In a previous blog, I explained how the U.S. Supreme Court removed certain roadblocks that were stifling President Trump’s travel ban. As a result, parts of the ban were allowed to proceed, but it could only be enforced against people who do not have a “bona fide connection” with a U.S.-based relative or entity.
There was a lot of ambiguity in the Court’s ruling because it only gave two examples of relatives who qualify for exclusion from the ban: a spouse and a mother-in-law. The Trump administration subsequently released guidelines that interpreted the ruling not to include grandparents, uncles, aunts, and other relatives.
Shortly after, Federal District Judge Derrick Watson ruled that this interpretation is too narrow, and that grandparents and other close relatives should not be affected by the ban. The Trump administration then requested that the Supreme Court put that decision on hold.
According to CNN, the Court kept the decision intact. This means that grandparents and other close relatives from the six affected countries (Libya, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Yemen, and Somalia) will be excluded from the travel ban.
Other exclusions include people who enter the United States to attend a university, give a speech, or work a job with a U.S. company. However, the Court did specify that the travel ban will still apply to anyone who forms a relationship with a U.S. person or entity just to get around the ban.
If you are planning to enter the United States from one of the countries affected by the travel ban, you will need evidence to prove that you do in fact have a bona fide connection with a U.S. relative or entity. If you do not have that evidence, you might not be allowed to enter the country—even if you should be exempt from the travel ban.
As your immigration attorney, I will help you gather that evidence. I am up to date on all recent changes to U.S. immigration procedures, and I will provide reliable legal guidance throughout your immigration proceedings. Call 973-453-2009 to schedule a consultation at the Law Office of Eric M. Mark.
Supreme Court Upheld Broad Restrictions Against Refugees
The Supreme Court suspended part of Judge Watson’s ruling, which means the ban on about 24,000 refugees will remain intact. As the New York Times explains, conservative Justices Samuel A. Alito Jr., Neil M. Gorsuch, and Clarence Thomas said they wanted to block Judge Watson’s entire order while the case proceeds.
In October, the Supreme Court is scheduled to decide whether the travel ban is lawful. In the meantime, the ban will continue to cause confusion in our country’s airports, spark global opposition, and encourage a flood of litigation.
If you think the travel ban might affect you or your family, call my New Jersey office. I will evaluate your situation and help you identify the best way to proceed with your immigration goals. Call 973-453-2009 today to schedule a consultation with a green card attorney.