Supreme Court sides with Trump on travel ban

The Supreme Court agreed Monday to let President Trump’s immigration travel ban go into effect for some travelers. The court will hear the case in the early fall.

No surprise, folks. The president has tremendous constitutional authority in this area of law, and without a novel new “it’s unconstitutional because he’s a bigot” doctrine, there’s no way the lower court orders could stand. We will see whether the Supreme Court agrees that an executive order can be banned on the grounds of campaign rhetoric. Scott Somerville

Very tired of this travel ban issue. It never was a Muslim ban. That means people from other Muslim-majority countries are allowed to come to the U.S.

Trump is our top diplomat in foreign policy. It amazes me how many have forgotten that inconvenient fact. Strongly disapprove of those who won't let him do his elected job. I did not vote for Trump; but as our president, I expect him to do the job. Baron Gil

Anyone who opposes the travel ban should be required to remove the door locks from their car and house. Jeff Harris

Interesting that the liberal justices sided with conservatives; the vote was 6-3 on portions of it. The three dissenting votes were conservative justices who in their dissent noted that the statute is clear and would’ve applied the ban to all travelers. So, it's partially in effect until the next term when they will hear the case.

It is also worth nothing that none of the justices, liberal or conservative, viewed Trump’s campaign rhetoric as having merit; the ban is legal. David Nelson

The 9th Circuit Court loses again. Those judges should have consequences for ruling on “intent” in their opinion rather than the law. Stu Lewis

Trump’s travel ban is just common sense, in light of the recent attacks in Europe. We need an improved screening process to keep Islamic State of Iraq and Syria terrorists out of our country. Dwayne Landry