High court OKs Trump's travel ban, rejects Muslim bias claim

A sharply divided Supreme Court upheld President Donald Trump's ban on travel from several mostly Muslim countries Tuesday, the conservative majority taking his side in a major ruling supporting his presidential power. A dissenting liberal justice said the court was making a historic mistake by refusing to recognize the ban discriminates against Muslims.

President Donald Trump speaks during a meeting with Republican lawmakers in the Cabinet Room of the White House, Tuesday, June 26, 2018, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

The 5-4 decision was a big victory for Trump in the court's first substantive ruling on one of his administration's policies. It also was the latest demonstration of a newly invigorated conservative majority and a bitter defeat for the court's liberals.

The ruling came on an issue that has been central for Trump, from his campaign outbursts against "radical Islamic terrorism" through his presidency. He tweeted a quick reaction — "Wow!" — and then celebrated at greater length before TV cameras.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion for the five conservative justices, including Trump nominee Neil Gorsuch, who got his seat only after Republicans blocked President Barack Obama's nominee for the last 10 months of Obama's term.

Roberts wrote that the travel ban was well within U.S. presidents' considerable authority over immigration and responsibility for keeping the nation safe. He rejected the challengers' claim of anti-Muslim bias that rested in large part on Trump's own tweets and statements over the past three years.

People protest against the Supreme Court ruling upholding President Donald Trump's travel ban outside the the Supreme Court in Washington, Tuesday, June 26, 2018. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)

But Roberts was careful not to endorse either Trump's statements about immigration in general or Muslims in particular, including his campaign call for "a complete and total shutdown of Muslims entering the United States."

"We express no view on the soundness of the policy," Roberts wrote.

The travel ban has been fully in place since December, when the justices put the brakes on lower court rulings that had ruled the policy out of bounds and blocked part of it from being enforced. It applies even to people with close relatives in the United States and other strong connections to the country.

In a dissent she summarized aloud in court, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said, "History will not look kindly on the court's misguided decision today, nor should it." Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan also dissented.

Sotomayor wrote that based on the evidence in the case "a reasonable observer would conclude that the Proclamation was motivated by anti-Muslim animus." She said her colleagues in the majority arrived at the opposite result by "ignoring the facts, misconstruing our legal precedent and turning a blind eye to the pain and suffering the Proclamation inflicts upon countless families and individuals, many of whom are United States citizens."

Protesters hold up signs and call out against the Supreme Court ruling upholding President Donald Trump's travel ban outside the the Supreme Court on Capitol Hill in in Washington, Tuesday, June 26, 2018. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)

She likened the case to the discredited Korematsu V. U.S. decision that upheld the detention of Japanese-Americans during World War II. Roberts responded in his opinion that "Korematsu has nothing to do with this case" and "was gravely wrong the day it was decided."

The travel ban was among the court's biggest cases this term and the latest in a string of 5-4 decisions in which the conservative side of the court, bolstered by the addition of Gorsuch last year, prevailed. He was chosen by Trump after Republicans in the Senate refused to grant a hearing to federal appeals Judge Merrick Garland who was nominated by Obama in March 2016.

Soon after the ruling, the campaign of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, who orchestrated the strategy to keep the high court seat away from Obama, tweeted a photo of McConnell and Gorsuch.

The Trump policy applies to travelers from five countries with overwhelmingly Muslim populations — Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen. It also affects two non-Muslim countries, blocking travelers from North Korea and some Venezuelan government officials and their families. A sixth majority Muslim country, Chad, was removed from the list in April after improving "its identity-management and information sharing practices," Trump said in a proclamation.

The administration had pointed to the Chad decision to show that the restrictions were premised only on national security concerns.

Protesters call out against the Supreme Court ruling upholding President Donald Trump's travel ban outside the Supreme Court on Capitol Hill in in Washington, Tuesday, June 26, 2018. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)

The challengers, though, argued that the court could not just ignore all that had happened, beginning with Trump's campaign tweets to prevent the entry of Muslims into the United States.

Trump had proposed a broad, all-encompassing Muslim ban during the presidential campaign in 2015, drawing swift rebukes from Republicans as well as Democrats. And within a week of taking office, the first travel ban was announced with little notice, sparking chaos at airports and protests across the nation.

While the ban has changed shape since then, it has remained a key part of Trump's "America First" vision, with the president contending that the restriction, taken in tandem with his promised wall at the southern border, would make the Unites States safer from potentially hostile foreigners.

On Tuesday, he hailed the ruling as "a moment of profound vindication" following "months of hysterical commentary from the media and Democratic politicians who refuse to do what it takes to secure our border and our country."

Strongly disagreeing, Democratic Rep. Keith Ellison of Minnesota said, "This decision will someday serve as a marker of shame." Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress, and Sen. Mazie Hirono of Hawaii, who was born in Japan, both compared the ban and the ruling to the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II.

Critics of Trump's ban had urged the justices to affirm the decisions in lower courts that generally concluded that the changes made to the travel policy did not erase the ban's legal problems. Trump had also imposed a temporary ban on refugees along with earlier versions of the travel ban, but he did not reimpose a refugee ban when the last one expired in the fall.

The current travel ban dates from last September and it followed what the administration has called a thorough review by several federal agencies, although no such review has been shared with courts or the public.

Federal trial judges in Hawaii and Maryland had blocked the travel ban from taking effect, finding that the new version looked too much like its predecessors. Those rulings that were largely upheld by federal appeals courts in Richmond, Virginia, and San Francisco.

But the Supreme Court came to a different conclusion Tuesday. The policy has "a legitimate grounding in national security concerns," and it has several moderating features, including a waiver program that would allow some people from the affected countries to enter the U.S., Roberts said. Through April, the administration has granted waivers to less than 2 percent of visa applicants — 579 out of 33,176 — since the ban took effect. An additional 1,147 got visas through other means such as diplomatic or pre-existing refugee status.

Roberts wrote that presidents have frequently used their power to talk to the nation "to espouse the principles of religious freedom and tolerance on which this Nation was founded." But he added that presidents and the country have not always lived up "to those inspiring words."

The challengers to the ban asserted that Trump's statements crossed a constitutional line, Roberts said.

"But the issue before us is not whether to denounce the statements. It is instead the significance of those statements in reviewing a Presidential directive, neutral on its face, addressing a matter within the core of executive responsibility," he said

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — Elon Musk’s proposed Tesla tunnel loop under the streets of Nashville was met with opposition Tuesday by the metro council, which passed a resolution to put their concerns about safety, transparency and a lack of local input on the record.

The resolution, with 20 members voting for and 15 against with two abstaining, can’t force one of Musk’s companies to stop, stall or change their plans for the Music City Loop. But Nashville officials want to register their grievances after the politically connected tech billionaire’s company, The Boring Company, teamed up with willing state government partners to bypass local authority.

In July, Republican Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee and The Boring Company announced plans for the Music City Loop, featuring an initial 13-mile (21-kilometer) stretch that would include connecting the airport and downtown, which was later expanded to about 25 miles to include a second leg west of downtown. They promised a project that would come at no cost to taxpayers, albeit with free use of some state land near the Capitol. The first section of the tunnel is supposed to be operational by the first quarter of 2027.

The Nashville loop relies on a fleet of dedicated Tesla vehicles driven by trained drivers, with more than 30 stations being designed and the potential for more routes and stations. The company says the cost to ride is expected to be lower than other transportation options. The cars will be human-driven, though the company says it could explore autonomous vehicles in the future.

“Colleagues, public land needs to be for public good and public infrastructure decisions must prioritize the welfare, safety and express needs of Nashville residents,” said Delishia Porterfield, who sponsored the resolution, Tuesday night before the vote.

John Rutherford, a council member who voted against the resolution, asked his colleagues to set aside their political opinions about Musk. He said a vote of opposition would risk closing the door to any dialogue with The Boring Company.

A representative for The Boring Company did not immediately have a comment when reached by the AP.

The Boring Company has another Tesla tunnel in Las Vegas that already provides rides on the electric cars, though the full route isn’t finished. The company lists some research tunnels in use, including one in Texas in which passengers could travel in autonomous electric pods at upwards of 600 mph (965 kph). Plans for tunnels in some other cities have fallen through. Overseas, another Boring Company tunnel is planned for Dubai.

The Boring Company’s CEO Steve Davis said at the project’s announcement that they chose Nashville based on the need to address traffic and the partnership with state officials.

“Nashville has been fantastic. Moved at an incredible speed, so welcoming, so kind, so so friendly,” Davis said.

But Nashville officials, advocates and others seemed mostly blindsided at the announcement, and the council resolution questions why the city wasn’t “meaningfully” consulted about a major change to the transit roadmap in Music City, where transportation projects are still being rolled out after voters approved a transit-funding tax increase in 2024.

The resolution also draws attention to potential geological and environmental concerns, citing its underground porous limestone that creates risks for sinkholes and water movement, in addition to the city’s history of major flooding.

Last month officials from The Boring Company answered questions from the council and heard from residents, who voiced concerns about environmental impacts, safety of the tunnel and whether the company was compliant with the Americans With Disabilities Act.

Lindsay Lee, chair of the Mayor’s Advisory Committee for People with Disabilities, said the company gave vague assurances that the vehicles would be ADA-compliant.

“As far as anyone is aware, they do not manufacture wheelchair-accessible Teslas," said Lee in an email interview on Wednesday. "Are we supposed to believe that will change in time for the proposed launch one year from now?”

The Boring Company says it has “a strong track record in safely managing variable ground conditions,” including in Las Vegas. David Buss, the vice president of commercial and government affairs, told the council that Nashville was “a great place to do tunneling,” as evidenced by existing tunnels built previously by other entities.

This isn’t the first time that a Musk-owned company has drawn criticism from Tennesseans for operating around regulatory loopholes and without advance notice. His xAI data center began operating in Memphis in 2024, powered in part by pollution-emitting gas turbines, without first applying for a permit, which led to residents loudly protesting at city meetings.

FILE - President and CEO of the Boring Company Steve Davis holds a hat during a news conference announcing the company's intent to build the Music City Loop, a private transportation tunnel that will connect the airport to downtown, Monday, July 28, 2025, in Nashville, Tenn. (AP Photo/George Walker IV, File)

FILE - People protest against the Music City Loop, an underground tunnel by Elon Musk's The Boring Company, Tuesday, Jan. 20, 2026, in Nashville, Tenn. (AP Photo/George Walker IV, File)

FILE - Construction is seen for the Music City Loop, an underground tunnel by Elon Musk's The Boring Company, Friday, Jan. 16, 2026, in Nashville, Tenn. (AP Photo/George Walker IV, File)