A judge has ruled the right to familial association only applies “to people already legally in the U.S. and cannot be used to demand the country let in relatives who aren’t in the country.” The government has the right to ban visas including under President Trump’s Travel Ban.
The travel ban wasn’t supposed to apply to visas issued before the policy was in effect, but the families argued the government slow-walked their relatives’ visa approvals, leaving them snared in the ban. The families said the Trump administration acted with “animus,” making the delays and revocations illegal.
Judge Cogan rejected those claims, saying there was no firm proof of animus. He also ruled that the people in the U.S. had no fundamental constitutional right to demand relatives be granted permission to enter the U.S.
The ban has already been upheld by the US Supreme Court which confirmed that Mr. Trump has the same right to exercise this power as Mr. Obama or any president before him. Something liberals have ignored in an endless stream of challenges, lawsuits, and complaints against almost everything this President has done.
One more quick point. In his decision, the judge noted that
“This right [to familial assocation] exists once family members are lawfully present in the United States. Only then do they have a right against unjustifiable governmental interference in their family affairs.”
Does anyone else sense a much broader potential context to that argument than visa rights for family members outside the country?
