US House of Representatives on Wednesday passed a bill that limits the ability of a US president to impose travel ban on the basis of religion. The bill is informally known as the No Ban Act. It has come as a response to former US President Donald Trump's decision to bar travel from several Muslim-majority countries.

It was passed in US House of Representatives by a 218-208 vote. In order to become a law, the bill must pass in US Senate.

Passage of the bill has invited praise from the right groups.

Donald Trump had issued the ban shortly after assuming presidency in 2017. Most people from Syria, Iran, Yemen, Somalia, and Libya, as well as from North Korea and Venezuela were barred from travelling to US.

The ban was considered discriminatory and punitive. Joe Biden had struck down these provisions as soon as he became president earlier this year.

US House of Representatives on Wednesday passed a bill that limits the ability of a US president to impose travel ban on the basis of religion. The bill is informally known as the No Ban Act.

US House of Representatives on Wednesday passed a bill that limits the ability of a US president to impose travel ban on the basis of religion. The bill is informally known as the No Ban Act. It has come as a response to former US President Donald Trump's decision to bar travel from several Muslim-majority countries. It was passed in US House of Representatives by a 218-208 vote. In order to become a law, the bill must pass in US Senate. Passage of the bill has invited praise from the right groups. Donald Trump had issued the ban shortly after assuming presidency in 2017. Most people from Syria, Iran, Yemen, Somalia, and Libya, as well as from North Korea and Venezuela were barred from travelling to US. The ban was considered discriminatory and punitive. Joe Biden had struck down these provisions as soon as he became president earlier this year.

US House passes bill limiting president's power to bar travel based on religion

In a stinging rebuke to President Donald Trump, a US Appeals Court refused on Thursday to reinstate his temporary travel ban on people from six Muslim-majority nations, delivering another blow to the White House in a legal battle likely headed to the Supreme Court.

The decision, written by Chief Judge Roger Gregory, described Trump&#39;s executive order in forceful terms, saying it uses &quot;vague words of national security, but in context drips with religious intolerance, animus, and discrimination.&quot;

In a 10-3 ruling, a majority of judges on the US 4th Circuit Court of Appeals said that the challengers to the ban -who included refugee groups and individuals - were likely to succeed on their claim that Trump&#39;s order violates the U.S. Constitution&#39;s bar on favouring one religion over another.

Citing statements by Trump during his presidential election campaign calling for a &quot;Muslim ban,&quot; Gregory wrote that a reasonable observer would likely conclude that the order&#39;s &quot;primary purpose is to exclude persons from the United States on the basis of their religious beliefs.&quot;

The appeals court was reviewing a March ruling by Maryland-based federal judge Theodore Chuang that blocked part of Trump&#39;s March 6 executive order barring people from Libya, Iran, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for 90 days while the government put in place stricter visa screening.

A similar ruling against Trump&#39;s policy from a Hawaii-based federal judge is still in place and the 9th Circuit US Court of Appeals court is reviewing that decision.

The Trump administration has argued that the temporary travel ban is a national security measure aimed at preventing Islamist militant attacks.

The March ban was Trump&#39;s second effort to implement travel restrictions through an executive order. The first, issued on January 27 just a week after the Republican president took office, led to chaos and protests at airports before it was blocked by courts.

The second order was intended to overcome the legal issues posed by the original ban, but it was blocked by judges before it could go into effect on March 16.

The case is likely to be appealed to the Supreme Court, which would make the final decision.

(Reuters)

The decision, written by Chief Judge Roger Gregory, described Trump's executive order in forceful terms, saying it uses 'vague words of national security, but in context drips with religious intolerance, animus, and discrimination'.

In a stinging rebuke to President Donald Trump, a US Appeals Court refused on Thursday to reinstate his temporary travel ban on people from six Muslim-majority nations, delivering another blow to the White House in a legal battle likely headed to the Supreme Court. The decision, written by Chief Judge Roger Gregory, described Trump's executive order in forceful terms, saying it uses "vague words of national security, but in context drips with religious intolerance, animus, and discrimination." In a 10-3 ruling, a majority of judges on the US 4th Circuit Court of Appeals said that the challengers to the ban -who included refugee groups and individuals - were likely to succeed on their claim that Trump's order violates the U.S. Constitution's bar on favouring one religion over another. Citing statements by Trump during his presidential election campaign calling for a "Muslim ban," Gregory wrote that a reasonable observer would likely conclude that the order's "primary purpose is to exclude persons from the United States on the basis of their religious beliefs." The appeals court was reviewing a March ruling by Maryland-based federal judge Theodore Chuang that blocked part of Trump's March 6 executive order barring people from Libya, Iran, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for 90 days while the government put in place stricter visa screening. A similar ruling against Trump's policy from a Hawaii-based federal judge is still in place and the 9th Circuit US Court of Appeals court is reviewing that decision. The Trump administration has argued that the temporary travel ban is a national security measure aimed at preventing Islamist militant attacks. The March ban was Trump's second effort to implement travel restrictions through an executive order. The first, issued on January 27 just a week after the Republican president took office, led to chaos and protests at airports before it was blocked by courts. The second order was intended to overcome the legal issues posed by the original ban, but it was blocked by judges before it could go into effect on March 16. The case is likely to be appealed to the Supreme Court, which would make the final decision. (Reuters)

US Appeals Court refuses to reinstate Trump's travel ban on six Muslim countries

travel-ban-appeal

Travel Ban Appeal, News on Travel Ban Appeal, stories on Travel Ban Appeal, articles on Travel Ban Appeal, Travel Ban Appeal stories at Wion, Travel Ban Appeal news, Travel Ban Appeal latest news

travel ban-appeal

US House passes bill limiting president's power to bar travel based on religion

US Appeals Court refuses to reinstate Trump's travel ban on six Muslim countries