Statements (210)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| gptkbp:instance_of |
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
|
| gptkbp:argued_on |
National security concerns
Religious discrimination |
| gptkbp:argument_against |
Discrimination against Muslims
|
| gptkbp:argument_for |
National security concerns
|
| gptkbp:case_analysis |
Implications for civil rights
Relevance to current immigration debates |
| gptkbp:case_number |
Details of the legal arguments presented
17-965 Part of a series of travel ban cases |
| gptkbp:case_outcome |
gptkb:Majority_opinion
5-4 ruling Constitutional validity Impact on future immigration policy Constitutional validation of travel restrictions Legal victory for the Trump administration Reaffirmed executive discretion in immigration matters Ruling on executive authority Summary of majority opinion Upholds executive order Political ramifications for the Trump administration. Affected Muslim-majority countries. Debate over national security vs. civil liberties. Impact on U. S. foreign relations. Increased polarization on immigration issues. Increased scrutiny of executive orders. Influence on future Supreme Court nominations. Influenced immigration policy debates. Legal challenges to executive power. Legal framework for future executive actions. Public discourse on religious freedom. Set a precedent for future travel bans. Travel ban remains in effect. |
| gptkbp:case_significance |
Significant Supreme Court ruling
|
| gptkbp:case_types |
gptkb:Constitution
|
| gptkbp:context |
gptkb:Executive_Order_13780
|
| gptkbp:court_decision_summary |
Summary of the court's decision
|
| gptkbp:date |
April 25, 2018
|
| gptkbp:decided_by |
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
June 26, 2018 |
| gptkbp:dissenting_opinion |
gptkb:Justice_Brett_Kavanaugh
gptkb:Justice_Neil_Gorsuch gptkb:Justice_Ruth_Bader_Ginsburg gptkb:Justice_Samuel_Alito gptkb:Justice_Sonia_Sotomayor gptkb:Justice_Clarence_Thomas Dissenting opinion Equal protection under the law. Sotomayor, Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan Dissenting opinion criticized the majority Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's dissent Justice Sonia Sotomayor's dissent Religious discrimination. Unconstitutional discrimination. Violation of the Establishment Clause. |
| gptkbp:has_implications_for |
Strengthened executive power in immigration matters.
|
| gptkbp:historical_context |
Post-9/11 security measures
2016 Presidential campaign Rise of anti-immigrant sentiment |
| https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label |
Trump v. Hawaii
|
| gptkbp:impact |
gptkb:immigration
Immigration policy Travel restrictions Judicial review of executive actions Public opinion on immigration Political discourse on national security Led to further legal challenges. Muslim travel ban Legislative responses to immigration policy Influenced public opinion on immigration policy. |
| gptkbp:impact_on_muslim_travelers |
Affected Muslim-majority countries
|
| gptkbp:implications_for_future_cases |
Influenced future travel bans
Guided lower courts on similar cases Set precedent for executive power in immigration |
| gptkbp:involved_parties |
gptkb:Donald_Trump
gptkb:U._S._Department_of_Homeland_Security gptkb:State_of_Hawaii |
| gptkbp:is_cited_in |
gptkb:585_U._S._595_(2018)
585 U. S. 1 (2018) |
| gptkbp:judges |
gptkb:Neil_Gorsuch
gptkb:John_Roberts gptkb:Samuel_Alito gptkb:Anthony_Kennedy gptkb:Clarence_Thomas Majority opinion supported by five justices |
| gptkbp:judicial_outcome_summary |
Summary of the judicial outcome
|
| gptkbp:judicial_review |
gptkb:Sonia_Sotomayor
gptkb:Stephen_Breyer gptkb:Elena_Kagan gptkb:Ruth_Bader_Ginsburg gptkb:Justices_Ruth_Bader_Ginsburg Justices Sonia Sotomayor Judicial scrutiny of executive actions Judicial deference to executive actions Standard of review for executive actions Impact on future cases regarding executive orders Limits on judicial intervention in immigration policy |
| gptkbp:legal_context |
gptkb:immigration
gptkb:Executive_Order_13780 gptkb:Travel_Ban_3.0 First Amendment issues Fifth Amendment issues |
| gptkbp:legal_framework |
gptkb:United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Ninth_Circuit
Influence on immigration policy Framework for evaluating executive orders Judicial endorsement of travel restrictions |
| gptkbp:legal_issue |
gptkb:Separation_of_powers
Executive power National security concerns Religious discrimination Travel ban Constitutional authority Discrimination against Muslims Presidential authority over immigration Challenge to travel ban Travel ban constitutionality |
| gptkbp:legal_outcome |
gptkb:Separation_of_powers
Summary of the legal outcome Legal precedent established Increased scrutiny of immigration policies Constitutional validation of travel restrictions Constitutional validity of the travel ban Strengthening of executive power in immigration matters |
| gptkbp:legal_principle |
Executive power over immigration
|
| gptkbp:legal_representation |
Analysis of executive power
|
| gptkbp:legislation |
gptkb:Immigration_and_Nationality_Act
gptkb:DREAM_Act gptkb:Executive_Order_13769 gptkb:Executive_Order_13780 gptkb:Immigration_Reform_and_Control_Act Border Security and Immigration Reform Act Influenced immigration reform discussions Affected state-level immigration laws Shaped public opinion on immigration issues |
| gptkbp:lower_court_decision |
Reversed the travel ban
|
| gptkbp:majority_opinion_summary |
The Court ruled that the travel ban was within the President's authority.
|
| gptkbp:media_coverage |
Extensive
Extensive media coverage Polarizing Analysis of Supreme Court decisions Debate on immigration policy Extensive coverage in news outlets |
| gptkbp:outcome |
Upheld the travel ban
|
| gptkbp:passenger_traffic |
Increased scrutiny of travelers from certain countries
|
| gptkbp:policy_affected |
Travel ban policy
|
| gptkbp:precedent |
gptkb:National_security
gptkb:Kleindienst_v._Mandel Establishment Clause Sets precedent for future cases Precedent for executive authority in immigration Presidential authority on immigration Affirmed broad presidential powers. Limited judicial review of executive actions. Presidential authority over immigration policy |
| gptkbp:public_perception |
gptkb:Chief_Justice_John_Roberts
5-4 National security. Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch Chief Justice John Roberts' opinion Justice Anthony Kennedy's concurrence Justice Clarence Thomas' opinion Justice Neil Gorsuch's opinion Justice Samuel Alito's opinion Presidential discretion. |
| gptkbp:public_reaction |
Protests
Controversial Controversial decision Protests against the travel ban Support from conservatives Support from some political groups Support for the travel ban |
| gptkbp:related_cases |
gptkb:United_States_v._Nixon
gptkb:Zadvydas_v._Davis gptkb:American_Civil_Liberties_Union_v._Trump gptkb:International_Refugee_Assistance_Project_v._Trump gptkb:State_of_Washington_v._Trump gptkb:Kerry_v._Din gptkb:Kleindienst_v._Mandel gptkb:Trump_v._International_Refugee_Assistance_Project |
| gptkbp:related_to |
gptkb:National_security
|
| gptkbp:route_of_administration |
gptkb:Trump_Administration
|
| gptkbp:scholarly_analysis |
Executive authority
Constitutional implications Constitutional law discussions Analysis of dissenting opinions Impact on civil rights Public policy implications Impact on future cases Examined executive power limits Implications for civil rights Political implications of the ruling Analyzed religious freedom issues Discussed implications for civil rights Debates on executive power Human rights perspectives International relations considerations |
| gptkbp:significance |
gptkb:Constitution
Executive power Impact on immigration policy Impact on future immigration cases Impact on executive power Impact on religious discrimination cases Affirmed broad executive authority Constitutional interpretation of executive power |
| gptkbp:state |
gptkb:Hawaii
gptkb:Maryland gptkb:State_of_Maryland gptkb:State_of_Hawaii |
| gptkbp:bfsParent |
gptkb:Ruth_Bader_Ginsburg
|
| gptkbp:bfsLayer |
3
|