On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled that Donald Trump’s travel ban against residents of six predominantly Muslim countries can be fully implemented while legal challenges to the controversial policy move forward.
Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor were reportedly the only two members of the Court to oppose the decision.
The travel ban, currently in its third iteration since having been unveiled by Trump in early 2017, has been repeatedly struck down by lower courts across the country. However, as the ban has been modified and amended, the Supreme Court has increasingly become willing to approve portions of its legal merits. Observers suggest that this latest move might signal that the justices are likely to uphold this latest version of the ban.
Among the ban’s features that Monday’s ruling will affect is the question of whether travelers with “bona fide” familial relations in the United States would be covered by the policy. While lower courts had stated that those with close relationships in the U.S. would not be covered by the ban, the Supreme Court’s decision effectively reverses that exemption.
In its current form, the administration’s travel ban bars entry to the United States for people from Syria, Libya, Iran, Yemen, Chad, and Somalia.