Will SCOTUS Travel Ban Decision Lead to a 'Flood of Litigation'?
The Supreme Court on Monday set a hearing on the Trump administration's controversial travel ban for October. In the meantime, the executive order will largely go into effect.
The ban on travel from six Muslim-majority countries - Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen - is reinstated, as well as a 120-day ban on refugees.
Jonathan Turley, George Washington University law professor, said on "America's Newsroom" that one unusual part of the Supreme Court's decision is that they added one exception to the ban.
If an immigrant from any one of the countries articulated by the president in the order has a legal relationship with a person, school, business or other entity in the U.S., they will not be banned.
Bill Hemmer suggested that this "carve-out" in the order could result in a slew of lawsuits challenging what constitutes a "bona fide relationship" with a person or entity in the U.S.
Turley agreed with Justice Clarence Thomas' opinion that this remedy could prove "unworkable."
"Today’s compromise will burden executive officials with the task of deciding — on peril of contempt — whether individuals from the six affected nations who wish to enter the United States have a sufficient connection to a person or entity in this country," Thomas wrote, warning that it could lead to a "flood of litigation."
Turley explained that the State Department is accustomed to dealing with relatives, students and employees coming to the U.S.
He said the issue is that the court doesn't limit it to those three categories.
"What about other relationships? What if you have an association with an immigration group [or] you're brought in through a church group? Are those substantial relationships?" Turley explained. "That's going to produce a lot of litigation."
Watch more above, and be sure to like Fox News Insider on Facebook!