Page 9 - Campaign Statements News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

On the list, it's not a predominantly muslim country. what is she trying to get at? >> it's clear, a couple things is one, i'm sure that she won't be voting for president trump next round. beyond that, it's clear that she's very much encouraged the use of these prior statements out of court. in other words, she's looking at the campaign statements and saying this is so deeply offensive i would invalidate this law. justice roberts says there's a process. it's not permanent. they can fix it. we've had countries drop off and drop on. he referred to it as empty rhetoric. she likened it to the japa...

Something in common. and the challenger said the only thing these people have in common is nationality. but the supreme court again by the 5-4 vote said, no, the authority to impose this restriction is squarely within the president's power under federal immigration law. and i must say, hallie, based on the oral argument when this case was argued a few months ago, it seemed pretty clear that that's the direction they were going to go in. the touchier question was whether the supreme court would -- how they would react to the second line of attack which was that this law was passed with religiou...

Sense that if we understood president trump wanted to initiate a strike against theory which is a muslim majority country, he would be able to because it would have an impact on the muslim population which is an absurd suggestion. i can also be applied to this as well. the campaign statements were made before president trump took the oath of office. >> they guided his policy. >> not necessarily. not necessarily. even the statement for each of the oath of office, once he takes the oath of office he becomes the president. and he has to be able to act. you have to have the full force of his abili...

Justices were fairly sympathetic to the trump administration's argument. >> i think it was pretty clear that the four more left leaning justices thought the travel ban was likely unconstitutional. the four more conservative justices, the chief justice and justices alito, thomas and gorsuch were openly sympathetic to the administration. here as in so many cases justice kennedy for whom i clerked several years ago is likely to be the decider. he maded very clear at argument he was not buying many of the statutory arguments that were raised against the travel ban. and in the course of doing that,...

Statutory arguments that were raised against the travel ban. and in the course of doing that, he suggested that he would be wary of second-guessing the government's national security determination. but when it actually comes to the constitutional issue, he just didn't say very much. in fact, his main question was to express skepticism of the idea that the president could completely be let off the hook for his campaign statements. and so i think it's hard to predict these things and i don't mean to give you a copout but i just don't think it was as clear as some may think it was. >> that's well...