Supreme Court won’t hear ‘travel ban’ case, but refugee portion not addressed

I wish I could explain to you what all of this means for the UN/US Refugee Admissions Program which we reported got off to a flying start for FY18 with 98 arrivals since October 1, but I can’t.  I’m not a lawyer and the whole thing just seems like a huge mess that should not distract you from doing what you must do locally and on the state level (see here).

supreme court 2017

The Supremes should never have wandered in to refugee law in the first place by literally writing, although temporarily, new law.

However, until I read this story at The Hill about the ban, I had forgotten that the 120-day refugee moratorium was still in place until October 24th!

You can thus see how meaningless that moratorium was since 98 arrived in ten days from October 1 and October 10 with the third largest number being the supposedly banned Somalis.

(In fact thousands of refugees were admitted during the ‘moratorium’ at the end of FY17 because of the Supreme Court mucking around in refugee law.)

Here is a bit from The Hill that reminded me:

The court has not yet ruled on whether to ultimately hear the other challenge to the ban, which was brought by the state of Hawaii. That case also challenges the part of Trump’s ban halting the U.S. refugee resettlement program for 120 days. That provision does not expire until Oct. 24.

More here.

HIAS was a plaintiff in the case.

Moral of the story: You are going to have to continue local and state political organizing and not rely on the courts, or the President, or the Washington swamp to bring a resolution to the issue.

See my whole category entitled ‘Supreme Court’ if you want to learn more about what they did regarding refugees.



Click here to read the full article on its original website.