A Terror Case the "Travel Ban" Would Have Prevented
A lawsuit challenging the policy advances
By Todd Bensman on February 12, 2019
A federal judge in California has kept the life-support systems hooked up to a class-action lawsuit against the Trump administration's "travel ban" from eight countries. The February 4 ruling allowing the suit to advance in the Northern District of California court highlights the fact that, two years after the first versions of the travel ban were introduced, oppositionists are demonstrating a tenacity in crippling the policy or, failing that, to at least force open the side gate much wider.
President Trump's Supreme Court-protected Presidential Proclamation 9645, "Enhancing Vetting Capabilities and Processes for Detecting Attempted Entry Into the United States by Terrorists or Other Public-Safety Threats", sharply curtailed or completely banned travel from Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela, Yemen, and Somalia. It did so on the grounds of national security vetting, as suggested by its title.
https://cis.org/Bensman/Terror-Case-Travel-Ban-Would-Have-Prevented
