The Supreme Court has allowed a limited version of Trump’s immigration ban to be enacted, which neither fulfills nor validates the president’s plan, holds Ishaan Tharoor of the Washington Post. Banning immigrants and refugees from the six Muslim nations covered by the ban is misguided, given that not one of their citizens has ever killed an American in a terror attack. Cracking down on immigrants, who already face extensive vetting, has not been shown to fight terror. Domestic terrorists have posed a far bigger danger to U.S. citizens. The Supreme Court only passed the ban partially and will hear arguments against it soon.
Trump’s immigration ban being brought into effect by the Supreme Court should make the left-wing media reassess the partisan stance it took on the issue, suggests Jonathan Turley in The Hill. Journalists’ open hostility towards the president came to the fore particularly during the immigration ban discussion. Judges, too, demonstrated their biases when they rejected the first version of the ban in its entirety, when they should have been proposing amendments. The Supreme Court proved that the ban is a legitimate form of policy by the U.S. president that should be respected, independently of party lines.