Not long ago, professor from University of Richmond School of Law, Carl Tobias raised the possibility of the travel ban’s approval. However, this would come with a catch; theoretically, the court could allow for the ban to proceed and simply review its case during the next term. According to The Hill, this decision would call for votes from five justices. If the court were to grant a stay, the decision would imply the existence of the ban’s strong support; such support could possibly engender the triumph of the travel ban. Of course, only time will tell. A concrete decision has yet to be made.
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court instated a new briefing schedule which requires for all parties involved in the travel ban case to file their legal briefs no later than June 21, 2017. On June 22, the justices will decide whether or not they wish to hear the case. In light of these new occurrences, the President has taken the liberty of modifying the travel ban as a means of preservation. 72 hours after the lower court’s blocking orders are rescinded, federal agencies are under direct orders to instate the 90 day travel ban on people arriving from Yemen, Syria, Sudan, Iran, Somalia, and Libya.
