Trump v. Hawaii
Supreme Court of the United States · No. 17-965, 585 U.S. 667 (2018)
The Supreme Court upheld Presidential Proclamation 9645 — an entry restriction affecting nationals of several countries — against challenges that it exceeded the President's statutory authority under the INA and violated the Establishment Clause.
Decided
2018-06-26
Summary
The Supreme Court upheld Presidential Proclamation 9645 — an entry restriction affecting nationals of several countries — against challenges that it exceeded the President's statutory authority under the INA and violated the Establishment Clause. The Court held the President has broad authority under INA §212(f) to suspend entry of noncitizens when he finds it detrimental to U.S. interests, and applied a deferential "rational basis" review to the Establishment Clause claim.
Current status
This ruling is the leading precedent for how much deference a presidential proclamation restricting entry receives from the courts — relevant background whenever a new proclamation-based restriction (like the ones referenced in the high-risk-countries hold policy above) faces a legal challenge, though it doesn't decide the legality of any later, differently-worded proclamation on its own.
Related: Hold and Review of Benefit Applications from Additional High-Risk Countries
Read the primary source ↗Source: Justia: Trump v. Hawaii, 585 U.S. 667 (2018)
CaseWhy Plus
If you're tracking a case, get an answer grounded in this specific ruling and your case's own facts.
General information about a public court ruling, not legal advice or a diagnosis of any specific case. For guidance specific to your case, talk to a licensed immigration attorney.