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. District Court for the Southern District of California

Al Otro Lado v. Trump

In Al Otro Lado v. Trump, the United States District Court for the Southern District of California is considering whether the Trump Administration can prohibit certain people from seeking asylum at ports of entry.
Immigration and Citizenship
November 20, 2025

Trump’s fight to redefine ‘American citizen’ returns to Supreme Court

Courthouse News Service
After winning round one, President Trump wants the justices to tee up a final showdown...
Immigration and Citizenship
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

RAICES v. Noem

In RAICES v. Noem, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is considering whether the Trump Administration can prohibit certain people within the country from seeking asylum. 
Immigration and Citizenship
June 30, 2025

CAC Release: At the Fifth Circuit, the Government Argued that Alien Enemies Act Means Whatever the President Says. Its Drafters Couldn’t Have Agreed Less.

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth...
By: Smita Ghosh, Ana Builes
Immigration and Citizenship
June 27, 2025

Trump’s Invocation of the Alien Enemies Act Is Unlawful Because Tren de Aragua Is Not a Foreign Nation or Government

Since President Donald Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act three months ago to send hundreds...
By: Ana Builes
Immigration and Citizenship
June 27, 2025

CAC Release: Supreme Court Decision on the Scope of Injunctions Fails to Acknowledge the Importance of the Constitution’s Birthright Citizenship Guarantee

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in Trump v. CASA, Trump...