Trump v. Hawaii(en inglés)
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.
Decidido
2018-06-26
Resumen
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.
Estado actual
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.
Relacionado: Hold and Review of Benefit Applications from Additional High-Risk Countries
Leer la fuente primaria ↗Fuente: Justia: Trump v. Hawaii, 585 U.S. 667 (2018)
CaseWhy Plus
Si estás rastreando un caso, obtén una respuesta fundamentada en este fallo específico y en los hechos de tu caso.
Información general sobre un fallo judicial público, no asesoría legal ni un diagnóstico de ningún caso específico. Para orientación específica sobre su caso, consulte a un abogado de inmigración con licencia.