Trump v. International Refugee Assistance Project

On June 26, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari and partially stayed the nationwide injunctions that had blocked enforcement of President Trump’s Executive Order 13780. The order suspended entry into the United States for nationals of six predominantly Muslim countries and suspended the refugee program. Lower courts had halted the ban, finding it likely violated federal immigration law and the Establishment Clause. The Supreme Court allowed the travel ban to take effect for foreign nationals who lacked a “bona fide relationship” with a U.S. person or entity, thereby exempting individuals with close family, employment, or educational ties. The Court also scheduled full oral arguments for the fall 2017 term, setting the stage for a definitive ruling on the scope of executive authority over immigration.

The Supreme Court granted the government's application for a stay in part, allowing enforcement of the travel ban against individuals from the designated countries who lacked a credible claim of a bona fide relationship with an American person or entity. The Court also consolidated the cases and agreed to hear the full merits in the October 2017 term.

Whether the President's executive order on immigration exceeded his statutory authority under the Immigration and Nationality Act, and whether it violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment by targeting Muslims.

The decision intensified the national debate over executive power, religious freedom, and immigration policy. It temporarily restricted travel for many while carving out protections for those with U.S. ties, and it set the constitutional stage for the subsequent 2018 ruling in Trump v. Hawaii, which upheld a revised version of the ban.