Immigration and Citizenship

RELEASE: Constitutional Values Front and Center in Historic Muslim Travel Ban Arguments

The Supreme Court must determine whether it will repeat past mistakes and place national security fears above the law—or recognize that our government can keep our nation safe while respecting our laws and fundamental values.

WASHINGTON—Following oral arguments in the U.S. Supreme Court today over President Donald Trump’s Muslim travel ban in Trump v. Hawaii, Constitutional Accountability Center President Elizabeth Wydra, who was present for the morning’s proceedings, issued the following reaction:

As counsel for Hawaii explained, the founders were deeply concerned that the immigration laws not be used to exclude followers of a particular faith.

That constitutional value of religious freedom was front and center today, as well as the compelling stories of the individuals directly impacted by this unlawful and discriminatory ban.

The hearing today was historic: The Supreme Court must determine whether it will repeat past mistakes and place national security fears above the law—or recognize that our government can keep our nation safe while respecting our laws and fundamental values.

#

Resources:

CAC brief in support of Hawaii on behalf of Members of Congress in Trump v. Hawaii: https://www.theusconstitution.org/litigation/hawaii-v-trump/

“Our Constitution Forbids a Religious Test for Immigration,” David Gans, Take Care, April 19, 2018: https://takecareblog.com/blog/our-constitution-forbids-a-religious-test-for-immigration

“Trump’s new Muslim travel ban has same old problems,” Elizabeth Wydra, Seattle Times, April 14, 2017: http://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/trumps-new-muslim-travel-ban-has-same-old-problems/

##

Now in our tenth year, Constitutional Accountability Center is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history. Visit the new CAC website at www.theusconstitution.org

###

More from Immigration and Citizenship

Immigration and Citizenship
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Buele Morocho v. Warden Philadelphia FDC

In Buele Morocho v. Warden Philadelphia FDC, the Third Circuit is considering whether the Due Process Clause allows the Trump administration to imprison all undocumented immigrants during deportation proceedings against them.
Immigration and Citizenship
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Sosnava Rodriguez v. Ortega

In Sosnava Rodriguez v. Ortega, the Fifth Circuit is considering whether the Due Process Clause allows the Trump administration to imprison all undocumented immigrants during deportation proceedings against them.
Immigration and Citizenship
April 1, 2026

CAC Release: Justices Skeptical of Administration’s Domicile-Driven Approach to Birthright Citizenship

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Trump v....
By: Smita Ghosh
Immigration and Citizenship
March 31, 2026

Most Americans Favor Birthright Citizenship. That Wasn’t Always True.

New York Times
Elizabeth Wydra was quoted in the New York Times discussing the history of the Fourteenth Amendment's Citizenship...
Immigration and Citizenship
March 30, 2026

Why the Supreme Court will get the birthright citizenship case right

National Catholic Reporter
Smita Ghosh's Slate article about Lynch v. Clarke and birthright citizenship was cited in an op-ed in the National Catholic...
Immigration and Citizenship
March 21, 2026

Legal History Blog Weekly Roundup

Legal History Blog
CAC Senior Appellate Counsel Smita Ghosh's article in Slate about birthright citizenship was cited in...