High court cancels hearing on travel ban as questions linger on Trump’s latest policy

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday abruptly canceled oral arguments on President Donald Trump’s travel ban, signaling the beginning of the end for a politically charged legal case that could have produced a blockbuster ruling on the clash between presidential power and claims of religious discrimination.

A new, broader ban on travel prompted the unusual move by the justices, leaving Trump to face scrutiny on a policy that in some ways goes even further — indefinitely banning most travel to the United States from seven countries and imposing restrictions on two others.

But the president’s third attempt at controlling the border may finally stand up to the expected wave of new legal challenges. The new ban includes two countries that are not majority Muslim, which may insulate the president from charges that his actions are based on religious discrimination.

And the new ban was developed after a vigorous security review that administration officials said provided a legally unassailable rationale for the travel restrictions.

Critics say Travel Ban 3.0 is still little more than a dressed-up Muslim ban. And despite a less chaotic rollout, questions remain about how the travel ban will be implemented, who will be affected, how the countries were picked and whether it will work to prevent terrorist attacks.

Like his first travel bans, the president’s latest restriction mostly targets predominantly Muslim countries. But officials note that two non-Muslim countries — North Korea and Venezuela — are on the list this time. They say that should be proof that the latest ban was not designed to target one religion.

Critics are not convinced. They continue to point to Trump’s history of calling for a ban on Muslim entry into the United States. And they insist that the addition of two nonMuslim countries does little to alter the original intent of the restrictions: to keep Muslims from certain countries out of the U.S.