|
In March 2018, NADOHE was asked by ACE to join 32 higher education associations, including ACE, in the filing of an amicus brief on the Trump administration “travel ban.” Our joining in the amicus brief was based on the message of exclusion, or religious animus and the role it played in the Proclamation suspending entry into the United States. It was our belief, as reflected in the amicus brief that the immigration policy’s message of exclusion harms American college and universities; adversely affects academic exchange with international students and faculty, and that these impacts, by extension, harm our national interests.
On June 26, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 5 – 4 ruling that the Trump administration acted lawfully in “placing entry restrictions on the nationals of eight foreign states” which were mostly Muslim countries. The Plaintiffs in this case alleged that the President’s stated concerns about vetting protocols and national security were but “pretexts for discriminating against Muslims.” While the majority disagreed with the Plaintiffs, the dissenting Justices referred to Amici, including the brief for the ACE et al. NADOHE agrees with Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s dissenting opinion that the travel ban “was driven primarily by anti-Muslim animus…”.
We are deeply disappointed in the Supreme Court ruling because we fear that it will affect our students, faculty and staff who may feel targeted, unsupported and isolated from distant family members as result of this ruling. NADOHE will review the decision of the Court carefully and assess the impact that this ruling has on higher education, as we know others will be doing in the days and weeks ahead.
|