But legal experts had a message for the president: not so fast.
While the court appeared to side with the Trump administration on the president’s authority to temporarily bar visitors from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen, immigration lawyers and civil rights advocates said the majority of travelers from those countries would still be permitted to enter the United States under the supreme court’s directive.
“I think it’s a vast exaggeration to say this is a victory for the president,” said Jennifer Gordon, a professor of law at Fordham University who focuses on immigration.
Noting that at least five justices agreed on the need to grant visas to individuals with a “credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States”, Gordon argued that the court’s decision reflected a seemingly majority consensus that the Trump administration could not implement an outright ban on immigrants from the six-Muslim majority countries.
“In fact, you might read it as a signal … that the president might well lose on this,” she said.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/26/supreme-court-trump-travel-ban-r...