Immigrant advocates said Monday's ruling is a blow to those who have fought Trump's travel ban since January. "Presidents are given primary responsibility for protecting our homeland".
But the action indicates that the high court might eventually approve the latest version of the ban, announced by President Donald Trump in September.
The lower courts said that this would include grandparents, grandchildren, brothers- and sisters-in-law, aunts, uncles, nieves, nephews, and cousins into the States. Last week he shared on Twitter anti-Muslim videos posted by a far-right British party leader.
Michael S Glassner, executive director of Donald J Trump for President campaign committee, welcomed the decision. The addition of North Korea is mostly symbolic, since the government did not expect to see visitors arriving from that country. "We continue to stand for freedom, equality, and for those who are unfairly being separated from their loved ones". Some groups of people from Venezuela will also be affected.
The bans were roundly criticized as discriminatory, and courts ruled that Trump could not prevent people who had "bona fide" relationships with people in the United States from entering the country. The San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals and the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, will be holding arguments on the legality of the ban this week.
Two of court's liberal justices, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor, said they would have denied the administration's request.
Monday's decision doesn't necessarily mean the Supreme Court will again side with the Trump administration should it consider the ban in the future, Tumlin told Newsweek.
He later allied with the Houthi rebels hoping to exploit their strength to return to power.
KELLY: That's NPR's Richard Gonzales updating us on news today out of the U.S. Supreme Court.
Professor Alan Dershowitz of Harvard Law School, as well as Professors Jonathan Turley and John Banzhaf of the George Washington University Law School, have long maintained, contrary to the rulings of many lower court judges, that Trump's travel ban was constitutional and well within his constitutional and statutory authority regarding national security and immigration. The Supreme Court urged the appeals courts to issue swift rulings.