This is the latest installment in a year-end series looking back at some of the numerous victories by the ACLJ in 2018.
It was a case that reached all the way to the Supreme Court and eventually helped ensure that American’s could be protected from dangerous terrorists seeking to infiltrate and attack our nation.
In February, ACLJ filed an amicus (friend-of-the-court) brief in the United States Supreme Court urging the Court to continue to allow the full implementation of President Trump’s National Security Proclamation.
President Trump’s National Security Proclamation intended to begin enhanced vetting procedures of foreign nationals seeking entry into the United States.
Two federal judges blocked the full implementation of the Proclamation. The U.S. Supreme Court announced it would review the decision of the Appeals Court that upheld the injunction blocking implementation of the President’s Proclamation.
The President’s order, among other things, called for a global review by the Secretary of Homeland Security of nearly 200 countries to determine whether they provide sufficient information about their nationals seeking entry into our country.
The travel restrictions imposed by the National Security Proclamation were put in place to prevent potential terrorists and criminals from reaching our shores, as well as to encourage foreign governments to live up to their obligations to enhance security and share essential information with the United States.
During the review, there was supposed to be a 90-day suspension of entry into this country of nationals from six countries with terrorism concerns (Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen).
After the global review, it was determined that eight countries (Chad, Iran, Syria, Libya, Somalia, North Korea, Venezuela, and Yemen) did not satisfy the security criteria.
After review and consultation within the Executive Branch, the President issued the Proclamation and imposed immigration restrictions on nationals from those eight countries until they comply with the necessary security criteria.
We filed numerous briefs at all levels of the federal judiciary – including multiple filings at the U.S. Supreme Court – on behalf of the ACLJ’s Committee to Defend Our National Security from Terror, which includes nearly 300,000 Americans who continue to stand in support of the President’s efforts to protect this nation from the entry of foreign terrorists.
Our briefs explained that The Proclamation clearly serves a genuine secular purpose—protecting our national security—and is not motivated by anti-religious considerations.
We urged the Supreme Court to allow the Proclamation to remain in full effect, and the Supreme Court ultimately issued a decision upholding the constitutionality of President Trump’s national security Proclamation.
The decision by the Supreme Court reflected what the ACLJ argued from the very start – the Proclamation is squarely within the scope of presidential authority and represents a tremendous victory in ongoing efforts to defend and protect America.
It is only because of your support that we are able to fight these battles to defend the safety of our Constitutional Republic.
To help the ACLJ continue to have the resources we need to make these victories possible and continue these fights, please consider making a Tax-Deductible donation to the ACLJ through our year-end Matching Challenge. Your gift will be DOUBLED dollar-for-dollar through the end of the year.
You can read more in the ACLJ’s 2018 Victories series here.
Chip in today and double your impact.
Take action with the ACLJ as we continue fighting for life and liberty. Make a tax-deductible gift today. Have your gift doubled through our Matching Challenge.
Border security has assumed center stage in the wake of hundreds of Central American migrants overwhelming federal and local Mexican police in Tijuana, and storming the United States border at San Ysidro port of entry near San Diego, California as part of an effort to force their way in the U.S. At...
On May 8th of this year, President Trump announced the U.S. withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), or the Iran Nuclear Deal. The President took this action as the flawed agreement only postponed—it did not stop—Iran’s development of a nuclear weapon. It also did not address...
Who would have thought just a few short years ago that both Democrats and Republicans, who saw securing our southern border as an important issue and a point of agreement between the two parties, would be in a political battle over the matter? As the President and GOP members of Congress call for...
The historic five-hour meeting between President Trump and North Korea’s Kim Jong Un ended with a signed agreement between the two leaders. It is not a treaty, as it does not contain any details as to implementation or a way forward in order to bring about the general goals in the signed agreement.