Thursday 26 April 2018

At the Supreme Court, Trump's tweets under scrutiny in travel ban hearing.

Yahoo News photo Illustration;
 photos: AP, Getty
WASHINGTON — Should campaign statements made by a presidential candidate be considered relevant to actions taken once that person is in office?

That was one of the key questions facing the Supreme Court on Wednesday, as justices heard oral arguments in the highly anticipated case concerning President Trump’s travel ban, which primarily affects citizens of Muslim-majority nations.

Appearing first in support of keeping the ban in place, Solicitor General Noel Francisco argued for treating campaigning and governing as unrelated.

Francisco, who maintained that the version of the travel ban currently in place — the third iteration — was issued in response to a “worldwide, multi-agency security review,” argued that a candidate’s comments made during a presidential campaign should be considered simply as “statements made by a private citizen,” and that taking the oath of office “marks a fundamental transformation.”





By Caitlin Dickson.
Full story at Yahoo News.



No comments:

Post a Comment