president was acting legally when he bought people from iran yemen somalia libya and syria from entering the united states. u.s. federal judges ruled that migrant families crossing the us mexico border should no longer be separated the same judge also ordered authorities to reunite parents and children within thirty days sooner for children under five years old the ruling can be appealed by the white house. and khadr has taken the united arab emirates to the un's international court of justice for violating human rights the case was prompted by the blockade of cattle by four countries which has not entered its second year. rebels in the syrian province of dare i have vowed to fight on until the end as pro-government forces continue their violence to retake the area that's despite the u.s. telling. opposition fighters not expect its backing to stay in control of the city where the syrian uprising began in twenty eleven and jordan is vying to keep its border with syria close to an estimated forty five thousand people fleeing the fighting not a genuine has more. as the battle for dead inten

from libya syria somalia yemen and iran. and it was the president's right to impose a ban because national security is his responsibility donald trump was clearly delighted this is a great victory for our constitution we have to be tough and we have to be safe and we have to be secure but in what was described as a furious dissent from the bench of liberal justice sonia sotomayor referred to cannes that trumps open comparison of the travel ban to the decision that mandated the detention of japanese americans during world war two sort of my all said taking all the relevant evidence together a reasonable observer would conclude that the proclamation was driven primarily by anti muslim animus rather than by the government's asserted national security justifications. politicians and activists are now expressing concern that the supreme court has affirmed doldrums own opinion that he and he alone is in control of the country's national security and that he can act without oversight in deciding who comes into this country with thi

from libya syria somalia yemen and iran. and it was the president's right to impose a ban because national security is his responsibility donald trump was clearly delighted this is a great victory for our constitution we have to be tough and we have to be safe and we have to be secure but in what was described as a furious dissent from the bench of liberal justice sonia sotomayor referred to cannes that trumps comparison of the travel ban to the decision that mandated the detention of japanese americans during world war two sort of my all said taking all the relevant evidence together a reasonable observer would conclude that the proclamation was driven primarily by anti muslim animus rather than by the government's asserted national security justifications politicians and activists are now expressing concern that the supreme court has affirmed doldrums own opinion that he and he alone is in control of the country's national security and that he can act without oversight in deciding who comes into this country with this. we

from libya syria somalia yemen and iran. and it was the president's right to impose a ban because national security is his responsibility donald trump was clearly delighted this is a great victory for our constitution we have to be tough and we have to be safe and we have to be secure but in what was described as a furious dissent from the bench of liberal justice sonia sotomayor referred to counter the only comparison of the travel ban to the decision that mandated the detention of japanese americans during world war two sort of my all said taking all the relevant evidence together a reasonable observer would conclude that the proclamation was driven primarily by anti muslim animus rather than by the government's asserted national security justifications politicians and activists are now expressing concern that the supreme court is a own opinion that he and he alone is in control of the country's national security and that he can act without oversight in deciding who comes into this country with this decision we are concern

from libya syria somalia yemen and iran. and it was the president's right to impose a ban because national security is his responsibility donald trump was clearly delighted this is a great victory for our constitution we have to be tough and we have to be safe and we have to be secure but in what was described as a furious dissent from the bench of liberal justice sonia sotomayor referred to cannes that trumps comparison of the travel ban to the decision that mandated the detention of japanese americans during world war two sort of my all said taking all the relevant evidence together a reasonable observer would conclude that the proclamation was driven primarily by anti muslim animus rather than by the government's asserted national security justifications politicians and activists are now expressing concern that the supreme court has a own opinion that he and he alone is in control of the country's national security and that he can act without oversight in deciding who comes into this country with this decision we are conc

from libya syria somalia yemen and iran. and it was the president's right to impose a because national security is his responsibility donald trump was clearly delighted . it's a great victory for our constitution we have to be tough and we have to be safe and we have to be secure but in what was described as a furious dissent from the bench of liberal justice sonia sotomayor referred to counter the only comparison of the travel ban to the decision that mandated the detention of japanese americans during world war two sort of my all said taking all the relevant evidence together a reasonable observer would conclude that the proclamation was driven primarily by anti muslim animus rather than by the government's asserted national security justifications politicians and activists are now expressing concern that the supreme court has affirmed own opinion that he and he alone is in control of the country's national security and that he can act without oversight in deciding who comes into this country with this decision we are conc

president was acting legally when he bought people from iran yemen somalia libya and syria from entering the united states. the u.s. federal judge has ruled that migrant families crossing the us mexico border should no longer be separated the same judge also ordered authorities to reunite parents and children within thirty days sooner for children under five years old ruling can be appealed by the white house. a german rescue ship with more than two hundred migrants on board remains stranded at sea for a second day the ship called lifeline is off the coast of multi-byte it's unclear if it will be able to dock there multis says it doesn't have broad agreement from e.u. states and how to distribute the migrants even the spokesman for life on says some of those on board are in poor health john structures joins us live from multan what is the situation there now john. well at the moment there is still no official agreement between the maltese government and the european union to accept this ship here in the port of the letter behind me and the reason for that what we're hearing is that the s

accept the trump was acting legally when he signed the executive order barring people from iran yemen somalia libya and syria from entering the united states trump said the ruling was a vindication following what he called hysterical commentary from the media this is a great victory for our country. we have to be tough and we have to be safe and we have to be secure at a minimum we have to make sure that we vet people coming into the country we know who's coming in we know where they're coming from we just have to know who's coming here muslim advocacy groups described it as a worrying development. with this decision we are concerned that donald trump will move beyond the five muslim majority countries that are in the current version to not only target more countries but we even go after u.s. citizens and lawful permanent residents. we call on all americans to join with us in standing up to this egregious policy. so what was the successful case put forward for the travel ban she reports from outside the supreme court in washington d.c. . the trouble ministration had three main arguments firstly thi

from libya syria somalia yemen and iran a god and it was the president's right to impose a ban because national security is his responsibility donald trump was clearly delighted this is a great victory for our constitution. we have to be tough and we have to be safe and we have to be secure but in what was described as a furious dissent from the bench of liberal justice sonia sotomayor referred to counter the only comparison of the travel ban to the decision that mandated the detention of japanese americans during world war two sort of my all said taking all the relevant evidence together a reasonable observer would conclude that the proclamation was driven primarily by the muslim animists rather than by the government's asserted national security justifications politicians and activists are now expressing concern that the supreme court is a own opinion that he and he alone is in control of the country's national security and that he can act without oversight in deciding who comes into this country with this decision we are concerned that donald trump will move beyond the five muslim m

from libya syria somalia yemen and iran.

accept the trump was acting legally when he signed the executive order barring people from iran yemen somalia libya and syria from entering the united states trump said the ruling was a vindication following what he called a hysterical commentary from the media this is a great big tree for our constitution we have to be tough and we have to be safe and we have to be secure at a minimum we have to make sure that we vet people coming into the country we know who's coming in we know where they're coming from. we just have to know who's coming here was the advocacy groups described it as a warring development. with this. we are concerned that donald trump will move beyond the five muslim majority countries that are in the current version to not only target more countries but even go after us and lawful permanent residence. we call on all americans to join with us in standing up to this. policy so what was the successful case put forward for the travel ban shihab rattansi as more from outside the supreme court in washington d.c. the trouble ministration had three main arguments firstly this wasn't the f

from libya syria somalia yemen and iran a. and it was the president's right to impose a bomb because national security is his responsibility donald trump was clearly delighted this is a great cricketer for our constitution. we have to be tough and we have to be safe and we have to be secure but in what was described as a furious dissent from the bench of liberal justice sonia sotomayor referred to counter the comparison of the travel ban to the decision that mandated the detention of japanese americans during world war two sort of my all said taking all the relevant evidence together a reasonable observer would conclude that the proclamation was driven primarily by anti muslim animus rather than by the government's asserted national security justification politicians and activists are now expressing concern that the supreme court has affirmed own opinion that he and he alone is in control of the country's national security and that he can act without oversight in deciding who comes into this country with this decision we are c

accept the trump was acting legally when he signed the executive order barring people from iran yemen somalia libya and syria from entering the united states trump said the ruling was a vindication following what he called hysterical commentary from the media this is a great critically for our constitution we have to be tough and we have to be safe and we have to be secure at a minimum we have to make sure that we vet people coming into the country we know who's coming in we know where they're coming from. we just have to know who's coming here. muslim advocacy groups have described it as a warrior development. with this decision we are concerned that donald trump will move beyond the five muslim majority countries that are in the current version to not only target more country but retain should we even go after u.s. citizens and lawful permanent residence. we call on all americans to join with us in standing up to this egregious policy you know enough from she have tons of who's outside the supreme court in washington d.c. . the trouble ministration had three main arguments firstly this wasn't the

from libya syria somalia yemen and iran. and it was the president's right to impose a ban because national security is his responsibility donald trump was clearly delighted this is a great victory for our constitution we have to be tough and we have to be safe and we have to be secure but in what was described as a furious dissent from the bench of liberal justice sonia sotomayor referred to cannes that trumps open comparison of the travel ban to the decision that mandated the detention of japanese americans during world war two sort of my all said taking all the relevant evidence together a reasonable observer would conclude that the proclamation was driven primarily by anti muslim animus rather than by the government's asserted national security justifications. politicians and activists are now expressing concern that the supreme court has affirmed doldrums own opinion that he and he alone is in control of the country's national security and that he can act without oversight in deciding who comes into this country with. we

iran, north korea, syria, libya, yemen, somalia and venezuela. the ruling was 5-4 with the chief justice john roberts writing for the conservative majority. our justice correspondent jessica schneider is joining s s from the supreme court with details. jessica, we may have to interrupt you. we're about to get the tape of the president at the white house. once be we get the tape, we'll his reaction to all of this. tell us how the supreme court's decision ruled in the president's favor. >> quite simply, wolf, chief justice john roberts wrote the majority opinion, and he said the president has brought authority to protect national security by enacting this particular travel ban. justice john roberts, he put it quite simply, in fact, saying the proclamation is squarely in the scope of presidential authority. so the court ruling today that both under federal immigration law and the constitution, it was within the president's right to enact this wide-ranging travel ban that affects seven different countries. so while the lower courts and the challenger

it a tremendous victory for the american people the ban prohibits most people from iran and libya somalia syria and yemen from entering the u.s. . and the standard nationals accusing me of mazar me of carrying out a planned and systematic campaign against that will hinge on its latest reports names of thirteen military personnel it says a responsible for war crimes including murder rape and forced starvation human rights group says they should be tried at the international criminal court. and government forces say they've retaken two towns in the strategic province of dead up the u.n. says at least forty five thousand people have fled the intensified fighting in the south they're heading for the georgian border but the government there says it won't let them in. rescuers remain confident they'll find twelve missing footballers and their coach alive four days after getting stuck in a flooded cave in northern thailand believed to be several kilometers from the entrance they've been stranded since saturday when heavy rain blocked their only exit scott hylas got the latest from shanghai. here on the fourth d

it a tremendous victory for the american people the ban prohibits most people from iran libya somalia syria and yemen from entering the u.s. . unless the international is accusing me and mines army of carrying out a planned and systematic campaign against that it can get its latest report names thirteen military personnel it says are responsible for war crimes including murder rape and forced starvation and human rights group says they should be tried at the international criminal court. proceeding and government forces say they've retaken two towns in the strategic province of the the u.n. says at least forty five thousand people a fled the intensified fighting in the south there heading for the georgian border but the government there says it won't let them in. malaysia police say they'll soon call in former prime minister najib razak and his. wife for questioning over allegations of money laundering and corruption items seized from property linked to the couple have been valued at more than two hundred fifty million dollars among them a collections of luxury handbags worth twenty three million dol

on travel from several mainly muslim countries about his travels from five nations iran libya somalia syria and yemen the court rejected arguments that it discriminated against muslims and reversed rulings by lower courts that the measure was unconstitutional i have to build i will say now the move remains controversial. why. critics of the travel ban had hoped until the last minute that it wouldn't stand up in the highest court of law but that hype was dashed and replaced by shock and frustration but i am held here and they scream and shout. after months of legal wrangling the u.s. supreme court rejected the challenge that the travel ban discriminated against muslims the crowd here don't buy it back supreme court of the united states has just given a green light to donald trump's religious discrimination and it's giving him the green light to discriminate against a group of people based on their faith wherever and whenever he chooses. emotions are running high today my heart broken. taking so much in me to hold back tears but i want to cry. and it's not only muslims who are protesting the ruling. th

. >> reporter: this third version of the travel ban includes libya, iran, somalia,yemen, syria, as well as north korea and venezuela. it went into effect in december and will remain in place. administration argues the policy attorney general jeff sessions is pleased about the decision. we spoke to protesters of the aclu who were not happy sreme , action has been strong here in the bay area and across california. kpix 5 reporter jackie ward shows us: people who disag angelica alvarez for kpix 5. >>> the trump administration argues the policy is needed to protect the country from terrorist attacks. the president made calls for a travel ban a key part of his campaign for the white house. >>> reaction has been strong in the bay area and across california. reporter jackie ward shows us people who disagree with today's ruling who say their fight is not over yet. >> i think this decision is terrible and irrevocable. it's not that. o think this is a rs and trum victory, it is not at all. >> reporter: a fight the asian law caucus and cair california have been fighting for months. despite the sup

from several majority muslim countries including iran, somalia, libya, north korea, syria, venezuela, and yemen. >> i spoke to my parents this morning. they were devastated that they can't come and visit anymore. >> reporter: president trump on tuesday. >> the supreme court ruling was a tremendous victory for our country. >> reporter: one mr. trump says should be tough, safe, and secure. the conservative majority of justices taking his side in a major ruling, supporting his presidential power. >> the muslim ban has got to go. >> reporter: rallygoers in the south bay say they aren't surprised. instead they're focused on overcoming what they call the >> exposure during that bust on friday. medics rushed to the motel 6 on industrial parkway in hayward after an undercover alameda county he was seen driving erratically. there was a short chase and that's when he ran the car into a bedroom on elgin street. the man inside the room was not hurt but the driver did have to be extricated and taken to the hospital. the red cross is now on scene to help the residents while building inspectors check out the

iran, syria, libya, yemen, somalia as well as north korea and venezuela. so those are the difference between the previous versions, shot down in lower courts. the lower courts arguing that the president's executive order was prejudiced against muslims but the supreme court said today in their statement, their opinion that that's not the case, that the president has it within his authority to make such a decision to create a travel ban and limit the entrance of certain people into the united states. they also said that this has to do with legitimate reasons and nothing to do with religion. of course, you've got lawmakers on capitol hill weighing in and reacting along partisan lines. listen to republican lindsey graham's reaction. >> i thought it was a sound decision. this is not a religious ban. the first order was poorly written. the third iteration made a lot of sense to me, picking out countries with high threat levels with poor vetting process. makes sense. this ruling makes us safer. reporter: and it's -- 5 versus 4. 4 of the liberal justices voting ag

said revisit the travel ban remember it covers five middle east or african countries syria yemen iran libya somalia and also venezuela or north korea it seems the fear now after the band was up held is that that may only be the beginning with this decision we are concerned that donald trump will move beyond the five muslim majority countries that are in the current version to not only target more countries but should we even go after u.s. citizens and lawful permanent residents i say who's going to be in. is the president going to issue an executive order yes mexican's is going to issue an executive orders against people coming from honduras guatemala what's next. well he was here now to take us through some of the stories of people who are understandably incredibly worried about their futures of course and we've been talking to people from the countries affected by the troubles and keep in mind that this ban does not just affect those trying to enter the united states there's also a lot of uncertainty for those inside the country and here's what some had to say about the supreme court's decision.

iran, libya, somalia, syria and yemen. today's ruling notes the president's anin the campaign and in office. >> donald j. trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of muslims entering the united states. >> reporter: apart from any religious hostility, the travel ban is based on legitimate concerns for the country's safety and that's what counts, the justices said. >> the justices said that because the travel ban raises the issue of national security, they are not going to get involved in figuring out what a tweet means or a campaign statement means. >> reporter: but in a blistering opinion for the dissenters, justifies sonia sotomayor said the travel ban was anti-muslim motivated by animosity toward a disfavored group. she called today's ruling gravely wrong. the lawyer for the challengers said they at least pressured the administration to come up with a narrower travel ban. >> they forced the president to rejigger the policy and give it the veneer of constitutionality. >> the decision is a defeat for this woman i

it restricts travel from five muslim countries, iran, libya, somalia, syria, and yemen.he ruling notes the president's anti-muslim statements in the campaign and in ofonce. >>d j. trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of muslims entering the united states. >> reporter: the court said quite apart from any religious sstility, the travel ban based on legitimate concerns for the country's safety, and that's what co tts. justices said that because the travel ban raises an issue of national security, they are not going to get involved in figuring out what a tweet means or a campaign statement means. >> reporte but in a blistering opinion for the dissenters, justice sonia sotomayor said the travel ban was anti-muslim, motivated by amosity toward a disfavored group. she called the ruling gravely wrong. the lawyerhaor theenger said they at least pressured the administration to come up with a narrower travel ban. >> the federal courts forced the president to kind of rejigger e policy and give it the veneer of constitutionality. >> reporter: the decision is a defeat fo

nationals from 7 countries from entering the united states(pam) those countries are: iran, north korea, syria, libya, yemen, somalia ... and certain venezuelan government officials ..(ken)but this travel ban is different from the first travel ban issued in january of 2017... because of protests and lawsuits. the trump administration released the most recent version of the travel ban in september of last year.in december, the supreme court allowed this newest version to take effect pending appeal. (pam) the state of hawaii - as lead plaintiff - argued against the ban, saying among other things.. the president had overstepped his authority. (pam) the suprem quickly spread across not only the nation... but the world. (ken) tonight kron 4's j.r. stone is live at san francisco international airport. j.r. you talked with travelers, how do they feel about this? (j.r.)talk about mixed opinions. i spoke with people who are for this ban and people who are against it. sot it is clearly discriminatory and the supreme court ruled on the wrong side of history. muslim americans firing back at the supreme court's decision to uphol

applies mainly to travelers from five countries with overwhelmingly muslim populations iran libya somalia syria and yemen of their citizens are expected to feel the greatest impact travelers from north korea and certain vinit swale and government officials are also included in that bam well we want to hear now from one of the communities affected by the ban i'm joined by trita parsi he's standing by in our washington studio he is the founder and president of the national iranian american council it's good to have you on the show i want to ask you what were your initial thoughts when you heard the ruling by the u.s. supreme court. i was not surprised having seen how the court had reasoned on similar situations it was quite clear that the philosophy of this specific supreme court with this specific political tilt would not likely shoot down donald trump's travel ban but i think it's also important to understand that the opposition to that ban doesn't just follow one path there is a legal path through the courts and that path has now come to its conclusion but the legislative path has not even begun yet and

it restricts people from iran, north korea, syria, libya, yemen, somalia and venezuela from entering the united states. most of those countries are muslim majority. today's ruling,on for the president who was forced to cave last week on immigration, but repeatedly call from some version of travel ban on his campaign. that brings us back to our breaking election news tonight. primary night, cnn's senior political writer sarah hansen with me. and katelyn conner joins me, dana bash is going to join me in just a moment. thank you that you all for joining us. harry, this is a huge upset, what's going on? >> nobody thought that crowley was going down. there was some noise on the left that there was going to be a challenge. the intercept got behind joe crowleys. in the ninth district of new york in that kor cucaucus, and in that race is doing particularly well. there does seem there was some argue before tonight there was a lot of energy on the progressive side, there certainly was this evening. >> let's talk about her a little more. she's running to crowley's left. it says even with univer

nationals from 7 countries from entering the united states(pam) those countries are: iran, north korea, syria, libya, yemen, somalia certain venezuelan government officials ..(ken)but this travel ban is different from the first travel ban issued in january of 2017... because of protests and lawsuits. the trump administration released the most recent version of the travel ban in september of last year.in december, the supreme court allowed this newest version to take effect pending appeal. (pam) the at

the policy restricts nationals from iran, north korea, syria, libya, yemen, somalia...and certain venezuelan government officials ...from entering the united states. but this travel ban is very different from the first travel ban issued in january of 2017.mass protests followed at various airports across the country, lawsuits were filed, and the ban was blocked.in march 2017 - a second travel ban was unveiled - and blocked again. the trump administrtation released the most recent version of the travel ban in september of last year.in december, the supreme court allowed this newest version to take effect pending appeal. the state of hawaii - as lead plaintiff - argued against the ban, saying one - that the preshad overstepped his authority.and two - that the order violates the constitution's establishment clause- which bars the government from favoring one religion over another.at issue are some of the comments then candidate- trump made during his campaign - "donald j. trump is calling for a complete shutdown of muslims entering the united states"but today - chief justice john roberts said t

libya, syria, iran, look at north korea. look at again the countries that made up the travel ban. this very narrow, libya, syria, iran, yemen, somalia, north korea, venezuela if you're selecting seven countries, to actually tighten the grip on who can get travel visas to come to the united states, that's a pretty damn good start, isn't it? >> it absolutely is. this is a rogue' gallery. but this is a good example of two things. one is as we alway say, elections have consequences, but constitutions have consequences as well. let's start by stipulating this is the legal normative system at work. that doesn't mean it's a wise decision. it doesn't mean that it makes sense geopolitically. i just returned from asia. and i'm watching the returns in asia, if you will. and i'm seeing big muslim countries, indonesia, malaysia, countries we want on our side. to see this. i'm watching our allies in the region. sunni arab states like saudi arabia, jordan, uae. egypt, looking at this. and i'm looking at americans looking at this. i would say it's a legal decision. but boy, is it bad geopolitics. >> well -- >> what do you think the impact of it is

iran, north korea, syria, libya, yemen, somalia and venezuela.ing was 5-4 with the chief justice john roberts writing for the conservative majority. our justice correspondent jessica

countries iran libya somalia a syria and yemen the court rejected arguments that it discriminated against muslims and reverse rulings by the courts but it was unconstitutional but the decision remains controversial across the united states demonstrators rallied to protest the ban on the supremes court's verdict visitors not have a home for a european comic is a bracing themselves for president trump's next move his next move it does seem increasingly likely that president donald trump will make good on his promise to impose tariffs on cars built outside of the united states president trump has ordered an investigation into whether call imports pose a threat to national security the washington based alliance of automobile manufacturers is now count ph the cost for american consumers if a twenty five percent levy is slapped on overall automotive imports so as you can see the price per car built abroad would rise by almost six thousand dollars so you can see why i call makers a concern the total annual cost to us can do you miss could theoretically amount to around forty five billion dollars

from libya syria somalia yemen and iran. and it was the president's right to impose a ban because national security is his responsibility donald trump was clearly delighted this is a great victory for our constitution. we have to be tough and we have to be safe and we have to be secure but in what was described as a furious dissent from the bench of liberal justice sonia sotomayor referred to cannes the only comparison of the travel ban to the decision that mandated the detention of japanese americans during world war two sort of my all said taking all the relevant evidence together a reasonable observer would conclude that the proclamation was driven primarily by anti muslim animus rather than by the government's asserted national security justifications politicians and activists are now expressing concern that the supreme court has affirmed own opinion that he and he alone is in control of the country's national security and that he can act without oversight in deciding who comes into this country with this decision we are

four to accept the trumps executive order was legal a ban prohibits most people from iran libya somalia syria and yemen from entering the united states. this is a great critically for our constitution we have to be tough and we have to be safe and we have to be secure at a minimum we have to make sure that we vet people coming into the country we know who's coming in we know where they're coming from we just have to know who's coming here the united nations says it's confirmed over eight hundred cases of children being used in the fighting in yemen some as young as eleven years old a new report accuses both huth the rebels and saudi and backed forces of recruiting child soldiers it says as many as seventy six child soldiers were used on the frontlines a government offensive to retake one of syria's last opposition strongholds has forced forty five thousand people to flee triggering warnings of another humanitarian crisis government forces backed by russian warplanes have launched airstrikes and ground battles to recaptured there are from rebel fighters most of the displaced syrians are heading to jorda

from iran, libya, somalia, syria, yemen, waiting to travel to the u.s.some predictably, democrats predictably lashing out at the poor decision. it is not a ninth circuit. it is not their favorite judge shopping cord. it did not work out so well today. take a look. >>or so today was fantastic fulfillment of usama bin laden's vision by donald j. trump. what usama bin laden wanted to promotewe was the west and 1 billion muslims, what donald trump and the muslim ban signal to the world is that muslims are not welcome here. >> if you are trying to rip off a supreme court justice, you can jam any polic you want down the throats of the american people. he has his supreme court tailor-made to his ugly philosophy. >> this ruling did not make us any safer, and i believe that the court was wrong. it's un-american to do what has been done. >> this is a moral moment in our country. what the supreme court decided today is not just wrong but dangerous and it makes us less safe. >> sean: joining us now, nra contributor dan bongino, senior fellow for the london center fo

iran, libya, somalia, syria, yemen.the president's anti-muslim statements in the campaign and in office. >> donald j. trump is calling for total and complete shutdown of muslims entering the united states. >> reporter: they said apart from religious hostility, it is based on legitimate concerns for the country's safety and that's what counts. >> the justices said because the travel ban raises an issue of national security, they're not going to get involved in figuring out what the tweet means or campaign statement means. >> reporter: in a blistering opinion, soto mayor said it was motivated by an moss tee for the group and calls it gravely wrong. >> the federal courts forced the president to refigure the policy. >> reporter: it is a defeat. she wanted to get her relatives here. >> my grandparents and auntsnd uncles in libya can't come. i had a wedding planned last week, they weren't able to attend. >> reporter: it is a legal victory for president trump and an important statement from the supreme court on the extent of p

it affects iran, libya, somalia, syria, yemen and north korea and venezuela. when the ruling came down, president trump immediately tweeted, quote, supreme court upholds trump travel ban. wow! >> and we have team coverage. scott mcgrew is ready for analysis but first to pete suratos in san francisco where groups mobilized fast after the decision. pete? >> reporter: good morning, marcus. a swift reaction about the opponents. the cancel of american islamic relations and the asian law caucus weighing in on the decision to uphold this travel ban. despite the decision, the speakers we just heard from said the travel ban they describe as having an anti-muslim sentiment. the different version of the travel ban, we've seen a number of different versions, have caused chaos ant controversy since the president has taken the office. here is the reaction on the steps of san francisco city hall, not too long ago in regards to this travel ban. >> i'm here to say trump, we will not back down. we will continue to fight. we will continue to stand up and we will continue to be h

the court ruling 5-4, upholding the president's travel ban libya, syria, iran, yemen, somalia, north and ven waila, the third attempt to put a travel ban in place. he first tried to put a ban in place about a week after he took office. hallie jackson is inside that white house briefing room, standing by. hallie, again, to pick up where you just sort of left off two or three minutes ago as we wait for this tape to start playing. the president a bit of an understatement to say he's taking a bit of a victory lap. >> we've seen it. that's exactly what we're hearing. my colleagues who are in the pool who goes in for these events walked out

" the ban targets people from syria, iran, libya, yemen and somalia.upreme court ruled 5—4 in favour — going precisely with the conservative majority. chiefjustice john roberts wrote that the ban was, quote, "squarely within the scope of presidential authority". and here's the president himself. the ruling shows that all of the attacks from the media and the democrat politicians are wrong, and they turned out to be very wrong. what we are looking for as republicans, i can tell you, is strong borders, no crime. what the democrats are looking at is open borders, which will bring tremendous crime. it will bring ms—13 and lots of others that we don't want to have in our country. bernie sanders tweeted: next, this is the president of a group called muslim advocates. with this decision, we are concerned that donald trump will move beyond the five muslim majority countries that are in the current version, to not only target more countries, but potentially even go after us citizens and lawful permanent residents. one former republican congressman, joe walsh, t

policy affects travelers from five countries with overwhelmingly muslim populations, iran, libya, somalia, syria and yemen and also two nonmuslim countries, north korea and venezuela. critics have long claimed the rules are racist in their root and they exceed the president's authority under immigration law as well as under the constitution. the supreme court today disagreeing. democrats saying while they respect the decision, the ruling was un-american. here's illinois senator dick durbin. >> we need to keep out every dangerous person who tries to come to this country. but to categorially ban people because of the country they're in is not the way we should do things in america. kennedy: he wouldn't be saying that if this were president obama's edict. what does the ruling mean and is the battle over or just begun. joining me now, the host of fox news at night, it is shannon bream, the resident supreme court mistressf all. shannon, i'm really curious to see how this version differs from the first version that the white house put out which was, the rollout was kind of botched. and what it says about the na