Lots of people have been arguing about the 'constitutional merits' of this ruling. I think they might want to take a step back and recall that this same court also just recently upheld the right of for-profit institutions to deny service to people on the basis of their sexual orientation, along with a number of other "interesting" decisions that all but invariably favor the Republican Party's positions. The same court also voted the same day that church-established fake abortion clinics cannot be required by California state law to disclose the fact that they do not actually provide abortions despite falsely advertising that they do in order to trick women out of getting them. (For perspective, there are currently three times as many fake abortion providers in the United States as there are real ones remaining.) The U.S. Supreme Court is likewise expected to issue another pro-Trump/pro-Republican ruling today, for that matter, that will even further erode the right of workers to organize and maintain labor unions because why not, a whole 10-11% of American workers are still unionized and that's just way too extreme and pro-labor a situation to have.
Besides the curiously one-sided recent history of U.S. Supreme Court rulings since the appointment of Trump nominee Neil Gorsuch, one may also consider the purported national security merits of this verdict. Namely, it may be worth pointing out that not a single one of these countries being targeted has yet produced a single terrorist attack on American shores. To me, this fact suggests facetiousness on the part of both the Trump Administration and the Supreme Court here. On the other hand, though, some of the countries on the list are currently overflowing with aspiring emigrants and refugees due to situations like civil war, drug-traffickers taking over major cities, etc. etc., so there are lots of survivors in need of asylum. Methinks that the current administration and their crony court simply don't want said situation to produce an expanded ethnic and religious diversification of this country, in truth.
The motivations behind this policy strike me as similar to those behind such policies as the administration's concurrent, now-infamous "zero tolerance" border policy, the decision to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal and the Paris Accord on climate change and the UN Human Rights Council and the imposition of across-the-board tariffs. There is an isolationist tone and tenor to the Trump White House and to the attitudes of its various stooges that logically goes along with their authoritarian, elitist politics that consistently favor the interests of dominant social classes (business owners over workers and customers, men over women, straight people over gay people, citizens over immigrants and refugees, religious and ethnic majorities over religious and ethnic minorities, etc.).
That's my opinion. There will be a nationwide demonstration this Saturday in protest of this and other "interesting" Supreme Court rulings of late and the administration's "zero tolerance" border policy. At minimum, hundreds of thousands are expected to attend. I will be there too.
Last edited by Jaicee - on 27 June 2018
