World

Ruling in travel ban leaves myriad questions unanswered

AP

The Supreme Court’s decision to partially reinstate President Donald Trump’s temporary travel ban has left the effort to keep some foreigners out of the United States in a murky middle ground, with unanswered questions and possibly more litigation ahead.

The justices ruled on Monday in an unsigned opinion they would hold a full hearing on the case in October. In the meantime, the administration can bar travelers from six majority-Muslim countries from the US if they don’t have a “credible claim of a bona fide relationship” with someone or some entity in the country.

It’s unclear what will ultimately constitute a “bona fide relationship,” though the ruling suggested that an American job, school enrolment or a close relative could meet that threshold. Equally unclear is how many foreigners will be affected from the six countries: Syria, Sudan, Iran, Yemen, libya and Somalia.

The ruling was seen as at least a partial victory for Trump in the biggest court case of his presidency. Trump claims the temporary ban is needed to prevent terrorist attacks. Opponents reject that and argue it’s a backdoor way to bar Muslims from entering the United States, as Trump promised in his campaign.

The early indications are that the administration will use the decision to take a tough line on travelers from those countries. A senior US official familiar with the situation said the Trump administration has plans in place to relaunch the stalled ban and tourists will be among those kept out.