Politics Headlines
Subscribe To This Feed

Drew Angerer/Getty Images(WASHINGTON) -- Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's public warning that Republicans might have to reach across the aisle if they can’t craft a workable health care bill came as an abrupt shift in rhetoric from the past two months, when the Kentucky Republican repeatedly noted that drafting the health care bill was up to the GOP.

After leaving a White House meeting with President Trump and most of the Senate Republican conference, McConnell said Republicans would either "agree and change the status quo" or "have to sit down" with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.

McConnell's comments could be read as a threat to his conference to fall in line, an acknowledgement of a possible outcome or something else. A spokesman for the majority leader declined to elaborate on this remark, but based on McConnell's past public statements, it is at the very least a stark deviation from his prior message.

Aides to McConnell pushed back on the notion that McConnell’s publicly mentioning Schumer was new or noticeable, telling ABC News that he "has said that 100 times” and sending a link to a story published Tuesday citing people familiar with his thinking.

But, as of this story’s publication, they had not provided any example of McConnell making this point in public.

Here is a look at some of McConnell's past comments on working with Democrats to pass health care legislation:

May 2 (two days before the House cleared its version of the Republican health care overhaul)

“The two top priorities of the administration of Senate and the House of Republicans are revisions to health care -- repeal and replacing Obamacare -- and comprehensive tax reform. There is a pathway to achieve both of those without Democratic cooperation.”

May 9

“We're in the process of working together to get to at least 50 Republicans, because no Democrats are interested in participating to change the status quo, which is completely unacceptable.”

May 23

“The Democrats are not interested in fixing this problem. They've made it -- they've made it very, very clear -- they have no interest whatsoever in fixing the status quo.”

June 13

“Unfortunately, it will have to be a Republicans-only exercise. But we're working hard to get there.”

June 20

"[Democrats] made it clear earlier they were not interested in participating in this. They have no interest in it whatsoever. We know they don't want to participate in what we're trying to achieve, which is to change Obamacare and make it better.”

June 27

“[Democrats are] not interested in participating in this.”

Copyright © 2017, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.



Subscribe To This Feed

iStock/Thinkstock(WASHINGTON) -- Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., is hoping to send Senate Republicans home for the Fourth of July recess with a revised version of their health care bill, but it remains unclear whether he can bridge the deep divides over the bill in his own party.

“Senator McConnell’s goal is to finish our work by this week so we can get an estimate from the CBO about the final cost of the bill. Then we’ll be able to vote on it in July,” Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., said.

With at least nine Republican senators still opposed to the bill, having concerns that span the ideological spectrum, it’s unclear which aspects of the draft McConnell can change to get the 50 votes he needs for it to pass.

“That is an existential question,” Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., told ABC News. “And it’s very hard for me to answer existential questions. Right now, there’s still kind of, ‘Can we do it?’ And I can’t answer that. I just can’t.”

“I’m totally optimistic. I think everything’s settled,” said a clearly sarcastic Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

Even the senators who have said they would vote "no" -- and whom would presumably be getting the most courting -- don’t know what’s on the negotiating table.

“I don’t know what the leader’s going to come up with this round," Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said of McConnell.  "And there are a lot of different interests that he's trying to accommodate."

Who wants what?

Senators who have staked out a relatively moderate position on the bill -- most of whom come from states that expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act -- are concerned that the bill as written would cause too much harm to recipients in their states.

Still other moderates, such as Collins, oppose the bill’s scrapping of federal funding for Planned Parenthood. Collins told reporters Tuesday that it will take fundamental changes, not just tweaks, to get her on board.

Conservatives such as Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, on the other hand, want insurers to be able to opt out of covering essential health benefits that are required under Obamacare, such as maternity and mental health care. Cruz has an amendment, which he pitched again during an all-Republicans lunch meeting Wednesday, that would allow insurers to scrap those coverage requirements so long as there is one plan available in each state that is compliant with the Affordable Care Act.

“It expands options for consumers. It expands the freedom of consumers to purchase more affordable plans. And I would note that there are a host of other plans we have discussed,” Cruz explained.

Other conservatives, such as Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, are fixated on scrapping the tax credits to help consumers pay for insurance, which is a fundamental part of both the House and Senate plans. It’s the sort of major structural change that faces tough odds to make it into the final bill.

New bill, new score

Even if Republicans can come up with a new version by the end of the week, it will still have to be re-scored by the Congressional Budget Office, which could take several days at least. It’s also possible many senators could reserve judgment until they see a revised score.

“The leader said he wants the talks to continue throughout the week. I'm sure we'll be having lots of back and forth with CBO in the coming weeks,” a spokesman for McConnell said.

“He's going to try to come up with something, and we're close enough that we can do that -- maybe even an agreement,” Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., said. “But it would not be any good because then we have to get a re-scoring of it, and that's where the additional 10 days come in.”

Plan B(ipartisan)

If Senate Republicans can’t get something done this week, some members suggest it may be time for Plan B.

One option might be to do a more piecemeal bill that offers insurance companies some reassurance that the market isn't going to be on a roller coaster ride for the next few years as Congress continues to sort out these existential questions.

“You gotta do something sooner or later because people are losing access to insurance,” said Sen. David Perdue, R-Ga., who wasn't against or even citing concerns about the original Senate draft.

Even Rand Paul has suggested that leadership break the Republican bill into pieces, so moderates could work with Democrats on some areas, such as market stabilization, and conservatives on others.

“I’ll vote for a more narrowly structured repeal bill -- and the big-government items the moderates want, they can still get ’em. They can put it in a bill that the Democrats love,” Paul said.

Copyright © 2017, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.



Subscribe To This Feed

Ingram Publishing/Thinkstock(WASHINGTON) -- The president’s limited travel ban could go into effect as early as Thursday morning, 72 hours after the Supreme Court ruling.

The Department of Homeland Security and State Department are operating under that 72-hour window and aiming to implement the limited ban on Thursday. There are no plans to delay implementation.

Lawyers from the Justice, State and Homeland Security departments are still working to define "bona fide relationship" and make sure the implementation of the order will be in compliance with the Supreme Court ruling. The Supreme Court said the ban could go forward with an exception for people who have "any bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States."

When President Trump signed his first executive order restricting travel, there was widespread confusion over who was permitted to enter the country. Visa-holders at airports were detained, d immigration lawyers scrambled to get them released and admitted into the country. None of this is expected to happen on Thursday.

Part of the reason is that anyone from one of the six countries who has already been issued a visa will be allowed to enter, according to a State Department official. No visas have been canceled by the ruling, and any refugee who is scheduled to be resettled before July 6 will be allowed to enter.

Homeland Security will also work with its components --primarily Customs and Border Protection, which screens travelers and inspects travel documents, and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, which has a part in refugee screening -- on processes and procedures for implementation, according to a DHS official.

No visa interviews have been canceled either. That means that until Thursday at 10:30 a.m. ET, the State Department could even grant new visas to individuals in the six countries without asking them to prove a “bona fide relationship."

After the 72-hour window closes, consular officers granting visas for the six countries will then begin asking applicants to prove a “bona fide relationship.” For refugees scheduled for resettlement after July 6, the State Department is still determining what will happen.

State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said Tuesday, “We want travelers or prospective travelers to know exactly what they may or may not be facing, so we’ll get that information out.”

While the White House may avoid the airport turmoil from January, there will likely still be legal disarray, with lawsuits about that key term and questions about how far along a family tree it extends.

Copyright © 2017, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.



Subscribe To This Feed

Drew Angerer(WASHINGTON) -- Top Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee have asked the FBI and Department of Justice for copies of any surveillance requests made as part of the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

In a letter sent Wednesday, Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., asked top law enforcement officials for any drafts or completed surveillance requests submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for approval, and any response from the court, which is tasked with reviewing government requests to spy on suspected foreign agents.

The request, sent to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe, cited two January reports from the Guardian and BBC that the FBI had applied for warrants from the court.

The committee, which has oversight of the Department of Justice, has asked for the materials by July 11th.

Copyright © 2017, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.



Subscribe To This Feed

Drew Angerer/Getty Images(WASHINGTON) -- President Donald Trump’s personal lawyers are postponing filing complaints with the Department of Justice and Senate Judiciary Committee related to former FBI Director Jim Comey’s admission that he leaked details of his conversations with the president to reporters.

A person familiar with the matter told ABC News the legal team’s decision was made so that special counsel Robert Mueller would have space to continue his investigation into Russian election meddling -- which has reportedly expanded to include whether Trump obstructed justice -- without the interference or distraction such complaints could create.

In his June 8 testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Comey explained how he shared the details of memos describing his discussions with Trump with a friend, who then passed along the information to The New York Times.

Though Trump's lawyers are backing away from a complaint now, they expect to act upon it at a later date.

“The complaint to the [Justice Department Inspector General] and the submission to Senate Judiciary regarding Mr. Comey’s public testimony will go forward at the appropriate time,” the source said.

ABC News first reported on lead attorney Marc Kasowitz's threat to file a complaint on June 9, the day after Comey’s testimony in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Comey revealed to lawmakers at the time that he shared the memos with the hope that the action would lead to the appointment of a special counsel.

Copyright © 2017, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.



Subscribe To This Feed

Jupiter Images/Thinkstock(WASHINGTON) -- Pressing ahead with a long-running investigation of a Russian software company whose products are used widely across the United States, the FBI on Tuesday interviewed several employees of the firm, Kaspersky Lab, a source familiar with the matter told ABC News.

As ABC News was first to report more than a month ago, based on sources familiar with the investigation, the FBI has recently been taking new steps to assess Kaspersky Lab’s relationship with Russian intelligence services.

Current and former U.S. officials worry that state-sponsored hackers could try to exploit Kaspersky Lab’s anti-virus software to steal and manipulate users’ files, read private emails or attack critical infrastructure in the United States -- and they point to Kaspersky Lab executives with previous ties to Russian intelligence and military agencies.

For years, such concerns have been communicated only behind closed doors and in secret memos. In February, the Department of Homeland Security issued a secret report on the matter to other government agencies. And two months ago, the Senate Intelligence Committee sent a secret memorandum to Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and Attorney General Jeff Sessions, demanding that they address “this important national security issue.”

But the issue was brought into public view in recent months by key members of the Senate Intelligence Committee, who began asking questions about Kaspersky Lab during open hearings on worldwide threats.

Just two weeks ago, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., proposed legislation that would impose substantial sanctions on Kaspersky Lab and its employees, including freezing its business inside the United States and blocking Kaspersky Lab's foreign employees from even entering the country. That proposal didn't move forward.

Speaking about Kaspersky Lab during a Senate hearing weeks earlier, Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., said: “We are very much concerned about this, very much concerned about the security of our country."

The company has repeatedly insisted it poses no threat to U.S. customers and would never allow itself to be used as a tool of the Russian government.

"As a private company, Kaspersky Lab has no ties to any government, and the company has never helped, nor will help, any government in the world with its cyberespionage efforts,” Kaspersky Lab said in a statement issued after the first ABC News report. "The company has a 20-year history in the IT security industry of always abiding by the highest ethical business practices, and Kaspersky Lab believes it is completely unacceptable that the company is being unjustly accused without any hard evidence to back up these false allegations.

"Kaspersky Lab is available to assist all concerned government organizations with any ongoing investigations, and the company ardently believes a deeper examination of Kaspersky Lab will confirm that these allegations are unfounded," the statement added.

In fact, the FBI and other agencies in the U.S. intelligence community have yet to publicly present any evidence connecting company executives with Russian security services.

"For 20 years, Kaspersky Lab has been focused on protecting people and organizations from cyberthreats, and its headquarters' location doesn't change that mission," Kaspersky Lab said in its statement.

In an interview with ABC News, Kaspersky Lab CEO Eugene Kaspersky said, "My response, if I’m asked to spy on anyone coming from any state, any government -- not only Russian -- will be definite 'no.' "

Products from Kaspersky Lab are embedded in homes, businesses and government systems throughout the United States.

An ABC News investigation found that, largely through outside vendors, Kaspersky Lab software has been procured by such federal agencies as the U.S. Bureau of Prisons, the Consumer Product Safety Commission and even some segments of the Department of Defense.

Kaspersky Lab is world-renowned for its anti-virus software and its analysis of new and emerging threats. On Tuesday -- the same day some of its employees were being interviewed by FBI agents -- Kaspersky Lab was cited in news accounts around the world for its take on a "ransomware" attack spreading around the globe.

Copyright © 2017, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.



Subscribe To This Feed

iStock/Thinkstock(WASHINGTON) -- A growing number of Republicans are speaking out against the now-delayed Senate health care bill.

The bill already had more than enough opponents to stop a procedural vote from happening. But more Republican senators have publicly sided against the bill after Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell postponed a vote until after the Fourth of July recess.

Nine senators are opposed to it (up from five) and two more have expressed serious concerns. Twenty-four senators said they are still reviewing the bill while 17 said they are either in favor of the bill or leaning that way. The Democrats in the Senate are united against the bill.

Sens. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, and Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., both released statements after the delay was announced saying they will not support the current draft of the legislation.

And Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan., said in a statement: “The Senate health care bill missed the mark for Kansans and therefore did not have my support.”

Earlier, holdout Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said Tuesday that she may still vote against the bill even if parts of it are amended in the coming weeks.

"It’s difficult for me to see how any tinkering is going to satisfy my fundamental and deep concerns about the impact of the bill," Collins said.

Copyright © 2017, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.



Subscribe To This Feed

iStock/Thinkstock(WASHINGTON) -- Counselor to the president Kellyanne Conway insisted this week that the Senate GOP health care bill does not include cuts to Medicaid.

Meanwhile, Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price said the health care proposal would not cause Medicaid recipients to lose their health coverage. The government "would not allow individuals to fall through the cracks," he noted. "We would not pull the rug out from under anybody.”

President Donald Trump promised during his campaign that he would not touch Medicaid, the federal health care program for lower-income Americans. This group includes expected mothers, children, seniors and disabled individuals.

But does the Senate Republican health care bill actually cut Medicaid funding and coverage?

While the estimated government spending on Medicaid would increase under the Senate health care bill gradually over time, it will spend less each year on the program than what the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, currently allots.

If Obamacare remains intact, the government would spend an estimated $415 billion next year on Medicaid, and $624 billion by the year 2026, according to the review of the bill from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

If the Senate bill is passed and goes into effect in 2018, the government would spend an estimated $403 billion on Medicaid that fiscal year. That number increases to $466 billion by the year 2026, according to the CBO.

The CBO also estimated that federal spending on Medicaid from now until 2026 would be $772 billion less than what is projected to be spent under the current law. The Senate bill, however, leads to more government spending on Medicaid in that amount of time than the House GOP bill.

The CBO's latest analysis was done using its March 2016 baseline.

States that opted into Medicaid expansion under the ACA by March 2017 would see government funding reduced starting in 2021.

The bill phases out funding at a lower rate for Medicaid expansion under Obamacare by 2024.

In 2021 under the ACA, states would receive 90 percent matching rate for states that opted into Medicaid expansion, but the Senate bill will chip it down to 85 percent. The Senate bill drops the federal matching rate by five percentage points each year until 2024. After 2024, Medicaid funding to states will be at the regular rate and could be cut further due to changes in how rate increases and payments to states are calculated. At that point, with reduced funds and little enrollment presumably, states’ governors may choose to forgo Medicaid expansion.

If the current version of the Senate GOP bill becomes law, states can choose whether to receive funds by a per capita cap, determined by the number of people enrolled, or a block grant.

The CBO report makes one thing clear: the amount of federal revenues collected and the amount of spending on Medicaid “would almost surely both be lower than under current law," and the number of uninsured people under the Senate health care bill “would almost surely be greater than under current law.”

Copyright © 2017, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.



Subscribe To This Feed

iStock/Thinkstock(WASHINGTON) -- Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told Republican senators he is delaying a vote on the GOP health care bill until after the Fourth of July recess because he does not have the votes to move it to debate, two senior Senate Republican aides told ABC News.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell formally confirmed the delay, saying, "We're going to continue the discussions within our conference on the differences that we have."

Sen. John Thune, R-Neb., stressed that the goal was to still replace Obamacare.

"While the schedule may have slipped a little bit, we are intent on rescuing Americans from a failed systems that has driven up their cost and made it more difficult for them to find coverage," Thune said.

Earlier Tuesday, Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn told ABC News: "I expect to have the support and get it done ... and yes, we will vote this week."

At least five Republican senators said they had opposed the procedural vote on the GOP health care plan, effectively blocking the bill from reaching the Senate floor.

In order to pass the health care bill through the Senate, Republicans can afford only two defections; in case of a tie, they have the option of calling in Vice President Mike Pence to cast the tie-breaking vote.

Before the delay was announced, Republicans senators were invited to the White House for a meeting with President Donald Trump.

"The president invited us to come down," McConnell said at a news conference this afternoon. "The White House has been very much involved in these discussions. They're very anxious to help, and we appreciate the invitation, and I hope all of our members will head down."


ABC Breaking News | Latest News Videos

Copyright © 2017, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.



Subscribe To This Feed

Ethan Miller/Getty Images(WASHINGTON) -- A political action committee for President Trump has pulled an attack advertisement against a member of the president's own party, Republican Sen. Dean Heller of Nevada, over his opposition to the Senate health care bill.

America First Policies PAC released the ad Tuesday, making it the first pro-Trump organization to publicly attack a Republican officeholder.

The advertisement asked viewers to call Sen. Heller and tell him to “keep his promise” and “vote yes to repeal and replace Obamacare.” The ad also says that a down vote by the senator would pose an obstacle to his own party and the Trump administration who it says finally have a “real chance to repeal and replace Obamacare.”

Erin Montgomery, the communications director at America First Policies, said in a statement Tuesday night the PAC was "pleased" that Heller "has decided to come back to the table to negotiate with his colleagues on the Senate bill."

"We have pulled the ads we released earlier today in Nevada, and we remain hopeful that Senator Heller and his colleagues can agree on what the American people already know: that repealing and replacing Obamacare must happen for America to move forward and be great again," the statement said.

The ad was released four days after Heller on Friday announced he could not support the Senate health care bill in its current form, which he said “takes away insurance from tens of millions of Americans.”

America First Policies was formed days following President Trump’s inauguration with the intention of supporting his agenda. It had planned was to release the advertisement on television and radio in Nevada in advance of the Senate vote on the health care bill that was expected this week and to conduct additional ad campaigns in 18 other states in support of the legislation.

The Senate vote was postponed Tuesday amid a lack of sufficient support for the bill.

Copyright © 2017, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.



Subscribe To This Feed

Spencer Platt/Getty Images(WASHINGTON) -- Roger Stone, a longtime associate of President Trump, will testify before the House Intelligence Committee on July 24 in a closed-door session, ABC News has learned.

Stone's scheduled appearance before the committee, which is investigating Russia's interference in the U.S. election in 2016 and possible ties to Trump associates, was first reported by Politico.

"Roger Stone has been maligned by innuendo and misinformation regarding all of the events surrounding this investigation," an attorney for Stone said in a statement. "Roger looks forward to using his time in front of the committee to set the record straight and providing a timeline based only on fact that will clearly establish that those on the committee who have misrepresented the facts regarding his involvement, did so based on false information and incorrect assumptions. I know my client looks forward to his testimony."

Stone has strongly denied any notion that he or others in the Trump campaign may have colluded with Russia in its interference in the election.

“I have had no contacts or collusion with the Russians,” Stone told ABC News chief anchor George Stephanopoulos on “This Week” in March. “There is no collusion, none -- at least none that I know about, in Donald Trump's campaign for president.”

Stephanopoulos asked Stone about a tweet he sent on Aug. 21, which read, “Trust me, it will soon be Podesta’s time in the barrel.”

Weeks later, Podesta’s emails were hacked and posted to WikiLeaks. U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded that Russia was behind the email hacking of Podesta and other Democrats.

“That was your tweet,” Stephanopoulos said to Stone. “And two months later the emails came out.”

“Correct,” Stone said. But, he said his tweet made no mention of Podesta’s emails. Stone insisted he was referring to Podesta’s business dealings.

“I never made any reference to John Podesta’s email. There were a dozen stories about his business dealings published after that [tweet],” Stone said.

Copyright © 2017, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.



Subscribe To This Feed

ABC News(WASHINGTON) -- Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign chairman, John Podesta, went to Capitol Hill on Tuesday for a closed-door hearing with the House Intelligence Committee investigating Russian interference in the election.

Speaking to reporters after the hearing, Podesta said he was asked "to come forward to give, to the best of my knowledge, what I knew about [the election interference] and I was happy to cooperate with the committee." He declined to discuss specifics from the session.

Podesta, a former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton and counselor to President Barack Obama, was caught up in the cyberattacks that took place at the end of the presidential campaign.

His emails were hacked and posted online last fall by WikiLeaks, revealing the inner workings of Clinton's campaign and political operation. The hack led to weeks of unflattering headlines for the campaign ahead of Election Day.

Asked about the Obama administration's response to the Russian efforts to influence the election, Podesta said the administration was "dealing with unprecedented weaponization of fruits of Russian cyberactivity."

"I think they were trying to make the best judgments they could on behalf of the American people," he said of the Obama team.

U.S. intelligence agencies have accused Russia of being behind the hack on Podesta and other hacking during the election.

Podesta's comments come as President Trump has increasingly criticized Obama's response to the Russian efforts to influence the election. After the Washington Post reported on the Obama administration's internal deliberations about how to respond evidence of Russia meddling, Trump said in a Fox News interview that Obama "did nothing" about Russia.

The Obama administration's response to the Russian meddling has come under some criticism. The administration repeatedly warned Russia against interfering in the election and made resources available to protect state election systems ahead of Election Day in 2016.

In December, after the election, Obama issued new sanctions against Russia and ejected alleged Russian operatives from the country.

Copyright © 2017, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.



Subscribe To This Feed

Alex Wong/Getty Images(WASHINGTON) -- President Trump suggested that he accepts the Senate health care bill may not come to a vote this week.

"This will be great if we get it done, and if we don't get it done it's just going to be something that we're not going to like, and that's OK, and I understand that very well," he said while with Republican senators at the White House on Tuesday afternoon.

Trump invited the senators to the White House amid problems securing enough support for a procedural vote that would advance the Senate's health care bill.

"We're going to talk and see what we can do," Trump said. "We're getting very close, but for the country we have to have health care, and it can't be Obamacare which is melting down."

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., announced Tuesday that an earlier plan to hold the procedural vote sometime this week will now be delayed until after the Senate's July 4 recess.

Copyright © 2017, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.



Subscribe To This Feed

iStock/Thinkstock(WASHINGTON) -- The Supreme Court's decision to partially implement the Trump administration's controversial travel ban raises questions about how it will be implemented before the case is formally argued in front of the Supreme Court this fall.

Here is a breakdown of what we know and don't know about the implementation.

What did the Supreme Court say?

The Supreme Court is allowing travelers from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen to enter the U.S. if they have a "bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States."

What qualifies as a "bona fide" connection?

That includes foreign nationals with familial connections in the U.S., students who have already been admitted into an American university, workers with existing job offers in the U.S. and lecturers who have accepted invitations to conferences in the U.S.

"It leaves open a number of questions of interpretation and implementation," said Kate Shaw, ABC News' Supreme Court contributor. "I think it might lead to a lot of litigation over the summer about who exactly has enough of a connection to the U.S. to satisfy the Supreme Court's standard."

Who will determine a "bona fide" connection?

State Department spokeswoman Heather Nuaert said at a briefing this afternoon that the State Department is waiting for the Department of Justice to give more details on the “bona fide” connection component.

Once that is determined, State Department officials will share that guidance with consular officers around the world, but the Department of Justice is still working on the definition, Nuaert said.

Visa applications are reviewed and decided by a consular affairs officer in an embassy abroad. It is up to these public servants' discretion to grant or deny an applicant, and that will still be the case under the ruling -- they'll just have to factor in someone's "bona fide" connection now, too.

John Cohen, a former Department of Homeland Security official and current ABC News analyst, said the classification "is not a term of art generally used by those involved in granting visas or other immigration benefits."

The term will have to be clearly defined before it is implemented "or there is a risk of inconsistent or even discriminatory practices at consulates and points of entry," he warned.

"Once defined, the definition will need to be communicated to those US government personnel involved in the process of vetting those applying to travel to the U.S. from those countries in which the ban applies," Cohen said.

When does it go into effect?

The State Department released a statement Monday saying it will implement the executive order in an orderly fashion 72 hours after the stay and after first consulting with the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security. Only after that, it said, will additional details on the implementation be provided.

"We will keep those traveling to the United States and partners in the travel industry informed as we implement the order in a professional, organized, and timely way," the statement said.

Copyright © 2017, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.



Subscribe To This Feed

iStock/Thinkstock(WASHINGTON) -- The Supreme Court said Monday that it is allowing parts of President Trump's travel ban to go into effect and that it will hear arguments in the case in October.

The announcement comes on the last day of the court's term before summer recess.

In allowing parts of Trump's executive order to take effect, the court narrowed the scope of injunctions that lower courts put on the temporary travel ban.

The Supreme Court is allowing implementation of the temporary ban on entry into the U.S. of citizens of six Muslim-majority nations, but with an exception for people who have what the court called "any bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States."

That includes foreign nationals with familial connections in the U.S., students who have already been admitted into an American university, and workers with existing job offers in the U.S.

For people from the six countries who have "bona fide" connections, the injunctions put in place by the lower courts are upheld. These individuals will not be banned under the executive order from coming into the U.S.

But anyone else from the six listed countries -- Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen -- who do not have such connections to the U.S. will be subject to the temporary travel ban.

“What the Supreme Court did today was to significantly narrow the scope of the injunctions, limiting them to people with a bona fide connection to the U.S. This is an many ways a clever compromise," said Kate Shaw, ABC's Supreme Court contributor. "But it leaves open a number of questions of interpretation and implementation. I think it might lead to a lot of litigation over the summer about who exactly has enough of a connection to the U.S. to satisfy the Supreme Court's standard.”

With Monday's court order, the travel ban is expected to go into effect in 72 hours in accordance with an earlier White House memo saying that such a delay would "ensure an orderly and proper implementation."

After 72 hours, the 90-day ban for foreign nationals from the six countries who lack bona fide connections to the U.S. and the 120-day ban for refugees without such ties will start.

Understanding the court's action

The high court's action on Monday was a per curium order, meaning that no specific author was identified, although three of the more conservative justices -- Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch -- all wrote separately that they supported going further by reversing the lower courts' injunctions in full and letting the ban go completely into effect.

Unlike the lower circuit courts that imposed stays and temporary restraining orders on the executive order, the Supreme Court didn’t look at Trump’s comments and tweets about Muslims. Monday's order appeared focused on balancing the parties’ interests, with its argument that Americans aren’t sufficiently “burdened” if they have no connection to the foreign national seeking entry, and the foreign nationals themselves don’t have a right to come in.

“Denying entry to such a foreign national does not burden any American party by reason of that party’s relationship with the foreign national,” the court order reads. It also says the travel ban would not “impose any legally relevant hardship on the foreign national himself."

The Supreme Court justices also agreed with the 9th Circuit Court's ruling that the government can begin conducting a worldwide review of its procedures for vetting people seeking to come to the U.S. The court said the administration should have enough time to “conclude its internal work and provide adequate notice to foreign governments within the 90-day life" of the ban.

Trump and the ACLU react

Trump appears to see the court order as a big victory.

"Today's unanimous Supreme Court decision is a clear victory for our national security," he stated.

"It allows the travel suspension for the six terror-prone countries and the refugee suspension to become largely effective. As President, I cannot allow people into our country who want to do us harm. I want people who can love the United States and all of its citizens, and who will be hardworking and productive. My number one responsibility as Commander in Chief is to keep the American people safe. Today's ruling allows me to use an important tool for protecting our Nation's homeland. I am also particularly gratified that the Supreme Court’s decision was 9-0," he said in the statement, again saying that there was a voted decision when there was not.

The American Civil Liberties Union, a party in the suit against what it calls a "Muslim ban," viewed the court order differently.

"President Trump’s Muslim ban violates the fundamental constitutional principle that government cannot favor or disfavor any one religion. Courts have repeatedly blocked this indefensible and discriminatory ban. The Supreme Court now has a chance to permanently strike it down," said Omar Jadwat, director of the ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project.

Copyright © 2017, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.



 

LOCAL NEWS

Governor Andrew Cuomo is calling New York lawmakers back to Albany today to extend Mayor Bill de Blasio's control of New York City schools, with some lawmakers also calling for immediate action...

Read More