Trump v. Hawaii: Explaining case cited in new US travel ban order affecting Cuba and Haiti
President Donald Trump on Wednesday signed a proclamation imposing travel restrictions on 19 countries, including a complete ban on nationals from 12 countries. The affected nations include Cuba and Haiti. The White House cited the Trump vs Hawaii (2018) as a legal precedent in its latest press release.
The proclamation, enacted under Executive Order 14161, fully bans entry from 12 nations and partially restricts seven, including Cuba (partial) and Haiti (full), to combat terrorism and national security risks.
Trump v. Hawaii upheld the president's authority to restrict entry, a ruling central to the new ban's justification.
Trump v. Hawaii (585 US 667) challenged Proclamation No. 9645, Trump's third travel ban, issued on September 24, 2017. It restricted entry from eight countries (Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Syria, Venezuela, Yemen), citing deficient vetting and security risks. Hawaii, the International Refugee Assistance Project, and others sued, alleging the ban violated the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and the First Amendment's Establishment Clause by targeting Muslims.
The case centered on whether the president's authority under INA Section 212(f) (8 U.S.C. § 1182(f))—allowing suspension of entry for foreigners deemed 'detrimental' to US interests—was lawful and whether the ban was motivated by anti-Muslim bias.
On June 26, 2018, in a 5-4 decision written by Chief Justice John Roberts, the Supreme Court upheld the ban.
The majority ruled:
Presidential Authority: Section 212(f) grants the president broad discretion to suspend entry when national security is at stake, supported by a worldwide review of vetting processes.
No Religious Discrimination: The ban was facially neutral, based on security concerns, not anti-Muslim animus, despite Trump's campaign statements. The Court applied rational basis review, finding the ban had a 'legitimate purpose."
Dissent: Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, dissented, arguing the ban was rooted in anti-Muslim rhetoric, violating the Establishment Clause, and drawing parallels to Korematsu v. United States (1944).
The 2025 proclamation relies on Trump v. Haiti to justify restrictions under Section 212(f), citing the same authority upheld in 2018. The new ban targets countries like Haiti (31.38% B1/B2 visa overstay rate) and Cuba (state sponsor of terrorism) for inadequate vetting and security risks.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
28 minutes ago
- Indian Express
India's trade strategy with China will have to rely on a ‘managed rivalry'
Written by Soumya Bhowmick India's trade relationship with China sits at the intersection of economic necessity and national security anxiety. While bilateral commerce continues to thrive in volume, it remains fundamentally distorted by strategic asymmetries. India's widening trade deficit, its reliance on Chinese technology inputs, and Beijing's growing support for Islamabad have sharpened the dilemma facing Indian policymakers: How to engage economically without compromising sovereignty and security. In response, New Delhi is reimagining its economic diplomacy through a 'China-plus-one' playbook — anchored in diversification, industrial policy, and regional recalibration. Bilateral trade remains substantial between the two countries, but it is significantly imbalanced. In FY2024–25, India's two-way merchandise trade with China reached approximately US$127.7 billion, making China India's second-largest trading partner after the US. However, this came at the cost of a record trade deficit of US$99.2 billion — the highest on record — highlighting deep structural dependencies in India's economy, particularly in the technology and pharmaceutical sectors. In light of these dynamics, Indian policymakers have adopted a cautious approach. Under a policy introduced in 2020, all foreign direct investment (FDI) from China and other countries sharing land borders with India must obtain prior government approval. In April 2025, Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal reiterated that India 'does not intend to encourage' Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) from China. By the end of 2024, Chinese firms accounted for only about 0.37 per cent of India's total FDI inflows. While easing these restrictions in non-sensitive sectors such as solar energy and batteries may be helpful, the prevailing geopolitical climate has stalled such proposals. Instead, India has intensified scrutiny of Chinese technology and infrastructure investments, banned dozens of Chinese apps, and maintained strict regulatory oversight over the telecom and electronics sectors. China's overt support for Pakistan has further deepened Indian scepticism. Beijing's financing and arming of a country India considers a direct security threat has amplified concerns about the strategic costs of deeper economic ties. In response, India has adopted diversification strategies, including strengthening economic partnerships with the United States, Japan, and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), as well as promoting domestic manufacturing under the 'Make in India' initiative. These measures aim to reduce dependency on any single partner while retaining space for selective engagement with China. This hedging strategy reflects a broader shift in India's foreign economic policy — from passive openness to strategic selectivity. India's answer to the widening trade gap with China is a two-pronged strategy: Build deeper commercial coalitions with trusted partners and turbo-charge domestic manufacturing so that tomorrow's supply chains run through, not around, India. The result is a deliberate 'China-plus-one' realignment that now threads through New Delhi's engagements with Washington, Tokyo, and ASEAN while anchoring at home under the Make in India and Production-Linked Incentive (PLI) drives. This strategy is not just about trade — it is about securing India's place in a reconfigured global production map. Such shifts reflect the growing convergence of commercial logic with strategic alignment. Washington has become India's largest goods-trade partner for the fourth consecutive year, with bilateral merchandise commerce reaching US$131.8 billion in FY 2024-25 — up from barely US$88 billion in 2019 — and resulting in India having a healthy surplus of more than US$41 billion. The new backbone of that relationship is the Initiative on Critical and Emerging Technologies (iCET), which has already green-lighted joint semiconductor, AI, and space projects and prodded both governments to prune export-control frictions. Tokyo complements this pivot by underwriting supply-chain security and industrial upgrading. More than four-fifths of Japanese firms operating in India intend to expand over the next two years, according to JETRO's latest global survey, by far the highest figure among major host economies. At the policy level, the Supply-Chain Resilience Initiative (SCRI), in collaboration with Japan and Australia, has targeted investment in electronics, batteries, and rare-earth processing hubs in India, specifically designed to mitigate single-country dependency. Japan's role is pivotal, not just as an investor, but also as a norm-setter for resilient and transparent value chains. Southeast Asia forms the third pillar. India's two-way goods trade with ASEAN hovers around US$110 billion. Still, both sides have agreed to fast-track a review of the ASEAN-India Trade in Goods Agreement to reduce non-tariff barriers and open services markets. Simultaneously, niche collaborations — such as semiconductor ecosystem talks with Singapore and defence-manufacturing tie-ups with Indonesia — are knitting India into 'China-plus-one' production networks across the region. This eastward economic orientation reinforces India's Indo-Pacific vision and places regional connectivity at its core. External diversification is reinforced at home by the PLI programmes, which now span 14 sectors with approved investments of approximately US$18.7 billion. One headline success is electronics: India has become the world's second-largest mobile phone maker, producing 99 per cent of the handsets sold domestically. Smartphone exports alone surged 55 per cent in FY 2024-25 to US$ 24.1 billion, leap-frogging petroleum and diamonds to become India's single most oversized export item and signalling a decisive shift toward higher-value manufacturing. India's industrial push is not only about import substitution — it is about export-led competitiveness in sunrise sectors. India's evolving economic strategy increasingly hinges on deepening ties with alternative partners across the Indo-Pacific. This pivot is also visible in recalibrating subregional engagement through BIMSTEC (Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation). As SAARC remains paralysed by India–Pakistan tensions, BIMSTEC has emerged as the primary forum for regional cooperation, offering a platform that bypasses Islamabad and aligns with India's Act East policy. At the 6th BIMSTEC Summit in Bangkok in April 2025, member states adopted the Bangkok Vision 2030. They signed new agreements on maritime connectivity and security cooperation, signalling intent to re-anchor the Bay of Bengal as a geoeconomic hub. For India, BIMSTEC complements its external diversification efforts by linking its northeastern states to Southeast Asian economies, spurring regional infrastructure, trade, and logistical corridors that sidestep China. Finally, India's evolving engagement with China reflects a strategy of managed rivalry — balancing selective cooperation with strategic hedging. Rather than decoupling, India is recalibrating its economic and diplomatic posture by diversifying partnerships, securing resilient supply chains, and reducing dependence on China, especially as Beijing deepens ties with Pakistan. This marks a shift from reactive diplomacy to a tactically layered approach, where competition is contained without collapsing ties. The writer is a Fellow and Lead, World Economies and Sustainability at the Centre for New Economic Diplomacy (CNED) at Observer Research Foundation (ORF)
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
33 minutes ago
- First Post
Canada ‘elbows up' as Carney backs down on digital tax to have trade deal with Trump
Canada has dropped its plan to tax US tech firms and resumed trade talks with America. The move has left many Canadians disillusioned, as the 'elbows up' slogan that once signalled standing firm against US pressure has now become merely symbolic. read more US President Donald Trump and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney. The Canadian PM earlier in May said his government is talking to the US about joining the Golden Dome missile defence program. AFP 'Elbows up', a slogan that began as a protest against President Donald Trump's tariffs, has now become somewhat ironic after Canada resumed trade talks with the US. Prime Minister Mark Carney announced that his government had dropped its plan to tax American technology companies. Many Canadians took to social media to share their disappointment, with some calling the move an 'elbows down' decision. Others mocked the government, posting comments such as: 'Good job, Liberals! You got duped! 'Elbows up' actually means tariffs up!' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'We are starting to get a sense of the character of the government and that it is a kind of chicken dance government. It is elbows up, elbows back down, elbows up, elbows back down.' — Garnett Genuis (@GarnettGenuis) June 30, 2025 'We are starting to get a sense of the character of the government, and that it's a kind of chicken-dance government. It's elbows up, elbows back down, elbows up, elbows back down,' said Canada's Shadow Minister of Employment, Garnett Genuis. Origins of 'elbows up' slogan 'Elbows up' became a slogan Canadians used to show resistance against US trade pressure. The phrase comes from hockey, where players keep their elbows up to protect themselves and hold their ground in tight situations. It grew popular after comedian Mike Myers used it in a sketch on Saturday Night Live, and Prime Minister Mark Carney echoed it in speeches to signal Canada's determination during disputes over US tariffs and political tensions. Started in hockey, meaning to protect yourself and push back Became a national slogan, appearing on signs, merchandise, and in political speeches, reflecting Canada's resolve to defend its economic and political interests Trade talks back on track as Carney backs down Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said on Sunday that trade talks with the United States have resumed after Canada dropped its plan to tax American tech companies. US President Donald Trump had paused trade discussions on Friday because of Canada's proposed Digital Services Tax, which he called 'a direct and blatant attack on our country.' The Canadian government announced it would cancel the tax 'in anticipation' of a trade deal. The tax was due to take effect on Monday. Carney's office confirmed that he and Trump had agreed to restart negotiations. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'Today's announcement will help resume talks aiming for the 21 July 2025 deadline we set at this month's G7 Leaders' Summit in Kananaskis,' Carney said in a statement.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
34 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Trump calls US-Japan car trade unfair, floats keeping 25% tariffs
US President Donald Trump floated the idea of keeping 25 per cent tariffs on Japan's cars as talks between the two nations continued with little more than a week to go before a slew of higher duties are set to kick in if a trade deal isn't reached. 'So we give Japan no cars. They won't take our cars, right? And yet we take millions and millions of their cars into the United States. It's not fair,' Trump said during a Fox News interview that aired Sunday. The comments show that the two sides still remain some distance from an agreement and highlight the risk that Trump may stick with the 25 per cent tariff on autos. The interview came out after another round of talks between Tokyo's top trade negotiator, Ryosei Akazawa, and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. Akazawa flew across the world to hold face-to-face talks in Washington, and while they initially met in person, two subsequent discussions took place on the phone. 'Japan-US negotiations are at a critical stage, and we will continue to engage in sincere and earnest discussions,' he said in a post on X. Both sides agreed to continue talks this week after the Trump interview took place on Friday, he added. Auto-related stocks on the Topix were down around 0.4 per cent in Tokyo, early Monday afternoon, compared with a 0.8 per cent gain in the overall index. The duty on the car sector has emerged as one of the key sticking points in the talks. Washington is focusing on its large deficit in the sector while Tokyo is trying to protect a key pillar of its economy. In 2024, Japan's trade surplus with the US stood at ¥8.6 trillion ($59.3 billion). Roughly 82 per cent of the gap was due to Japan's surplus in cars and auto parts. US statistics show that the deficit with Japan is the seventh largest among Washington's individual trading partners. Akazawa has repeatedly said that the US's car tariffs are unacceptable, saying that Japan's auto industry has made an enormous contribution to the US economy through the investment of more than $60 billion and the creation of 2.3 million local jobs. Japan has insisted on keeping the sectoral tariffs on cars and other items included in the talks on the wider country-specific levies that are due to go up on July 9. Akazawa has said he will keep the deadline in mind but won't fixate on it as Tokyo aims to settle all trade disputes with a package that addresses the sectoral tariffs, too. Statements released by the Japanese government over the weekend said Akazawa and Lutnick had 'fruitful' discussions and agreed to continue seeking a deal that is beneficial for both the US and Japan. The statements did not touch on what was discussed or what progress was made. The 25 per cent US tariff is already in place on cars and auto parts, along with a 50 per cent duty on steel and aluminum. The separate across-the-board tariffs, now at 10 per cent, will jump to 24 per cent if no deal is reached in time. Without a breakthrough in the negotiations, Japan's economy could be pushed into a technical recession after it shrank in the first quarter. Trump's statements in the interview gave no impression that Japan was any closer to reaching a deal or winning an extended reprieve on the reciprocal tariffs. Instead, Trump flagged that the US can set its trade terms with Japan unilaterally.
