Call it a win for the Trump administration? A new poll out from Politico/Morning Consult finds that the Trump “travel ban,” which restricts travel from several Muslim-majority countries to be fairly popular with the public at large.

Report from The Hill:

A majority of voters backs President Trump’s travel ban, according to a new survey.

A Politico/Morning Consult poll found 60 percent of voters support the State Department’s “new guidelines which say visa applicants from six predominately Muslim countries must prove a close family relationship with a U.S. resident in order to enter the country.”

Just 28 percent are opposed to the new guidelines, according to the poll.

A large majority, 84 percent of Republicans, supports the restrictions, while just 9 percent oppose them.
Democrats are split on the issue, with 41 percent supporting the ban and 46 percent opposing it.

The poll question does not specifically mention President Trump or his executive orders on immigration.

The poll was conducted from June 29 to 30 among 1,989 registered voters. The margin of error is 2 percent.

The poll comes after the Supreme Court last month decided to allow a limited version of Trump’s order to take effect.

It’s interesting that 41 percent of Democrats surveyed support the ban, though 46 percent oppose it. Those are some striking numbers in the President’s opposition party, especially on something as hotly debated and litigated as the travel ban.

Howver, as New York Magazine points out, the President may still be in legal jeopardy as the executive order remains controversial:

After a brief victory lap that included mischaracterizing a Supreme Court ruling that partly favored his badly weakened travel ban, Donald Trump and his administration may again land in hot water over its enforcement, which began in earnest late on Thursday and already has lawyers scrambling to limit it further. That’s because the justices, in an unsigned opinion, issued guidelines on how exactly the federal government would be allowed to carry out the executive order — guidelines which are significantly less restrictive about who may visit U.S. citizens than Trump’s administration would wish them to be.

In its watered-down form, Trump’s order institutes a partial ban on travel to the U.S. for nationals of six Muslim-majority countries for 90 days, and suspends the refugee-resettlement program for 120 days. Lower courts in Maryland and Hawaii blocked these provisions in their entirety, but the Supreme Court has since reinstated them — with important limitations. The main one: The Trump administration can’t shut out any traveler from the affected nations who has a “bona fide relationship” to a person or entity in the U.S. That’s a broad requirement that the justices repeated four times, and which should exempt from the ban just about anyone who has a documented, good-faith bond with someone already here.

But there’s no word on the status of grandmothers yet. As of Saturday night, the State Department still didn’t think they or “grandchildren, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, cousins, brothers-in-laws and sisters-in-law … and any other ‘extended’ family members” made the cut.

Which in turn explains why Neal Katyal, the lawyer representing Hawaii in its travel-ban challenge, suggested on Thursday that the Trump administration may be in contempt of the Supreme Court, which never explicitly blessed such a restrictive reading of its own decision.

For whatever reason, the Court did not want to more clearly define “bona fide relationship,” and instead decided to leave that issue to lower courts, or to Congress. As a result, there will be many travelers who do in fact have some kind of solid relationship with someone in the United States, but whether or not they fall within the bounds of a “bona fide relationship,” such as the example of someone’s Grandmother, will be up to judges and lawyers.

As it stands on the surface, this appears to be winning issue for Trump which gathers some bipartisan support from voters.

16 COMMENTS

  1. It’s nonsense. The stated purpose of the program was to allow 90 to 120 days to study how to screen arrivals.

    They’ve had over 160 days.

    So this is just another case of meaningless political theatre.

    • I agree completely, not only have they had more time to formulate their “extreme vetting” plan than their original travel ban would have given them, the only case that would have been at all affected by such a ban was the result of a fiance, not a grandparent coming into the country. One would think that that fact would have been considered when deciding who to allow and who to exclude.
      It just goes to show that this is a Muslim ban, based on religion, nothing else. And as such is a violation of the constitutional ban on religious tests.

    • You are right, they have had a long time. But what happened along the way, you had the ninth circus court stay the executive order and then you had some Hawaiian clown stay the second executive order. DUMBOCRATS are too busy shooting themselves in the foot when they stay these EO.?

      Isn’t it amazing, a full 41% of Democrats support the ban. These people are coming over to the right thinking people. It must be hard to be constantly ostracized as a LOONEY LIBERAL.?

      • The ban makes no sense at all, except to allow Trump to say he “won.” Scary that that is all he cares about.

        • Don’t kid yourself, saying that he “won” is not all that he cares about. It is the only thing he is actually aware of. And it is not that “we” or the country won, it is that HE, PERSONALLY, won.
          He is increasingly, and more obviously, more distant from any understanding of what is really going on in the world. As we watched Theresa May have to refocus his attention when he was obviously oblivious to what was going on around him we are forced to ask if he will be removed from office by impeachment proceedings, or by becoming UNDENIABLY mentally incapacitated. I make the qualification “undeniably” because many of us question his mental fitness to serve now, but in the future, maybe near future, his mental state will deteriorate to the point when no amount of managing by his “advisors” (handlers) will disguise his true state.

      • How, exactly, could staying an unconstitutional executive order(one based on a religious test) be considered as ” the Democrats shooting themselves in the foot”?

        By the way, I have to say your juvenile nicnames, and your infantile emojis are even less impressive than usual. But I guess when your worldview is completely structured around the great mythical sky father, we can’t hope for maturity.

        • My, my we are getting testy. You never liked my emojis but you never called them infantile.?

          I fear you will become testier come the 2018 midterms. The Democrats are going to be shelacked in both congressional and Senate races. The Democrats will become the new GREEN party. After this happens it will be a BEAR to read your tirades.??

          • I see that along with more even more infantile emojis, and some meaningless prattle, you completely neglected to answer my question.
            But, that is after all, the way your beloved leader conducts business, make a stupid statement and when someone calls you on it, change the subject. Why should I expect anything different from you?

            Here is your challenge. Go back to my previous post and see if you can find my question. Then try, no matter how feeble, make an attempt to answer it. I know this is asking a lot from a member of the religious right.

            • How, exactly, could staying an unconstitutional executive order(one based on a religious test) be considered as ” the Democrats shooting themselves in the foot”?

              Did you ever think to yourself that I didn’t answer your question because it was STUPID!!! Unless you have been living in a cave, you full well know that any president has the right to issue bans on immigration. The follow up you added about a religious test was what really makes your question DUMBER than it had to be.?

              You have been listening to FAKE NEWS for far too long. The fact that the ban is against 7 predominantly Muslim countries, doesn’t make it a ban against all Muslims.?

              When you have a question with some substance to ask, I will be happy to answer. Till then you are wasting my time. Now be a good American and listen to an inspirational speech from your president, Donald J Trump.?

            • Well, you managed to do very well, finding the question that is. It is in answering that you fell short. No president has the right to issue any kind of order that violates the constitution. The ban was stayed in large part because your president (not mine) stood up in a public forum and said”Donald J Trump is calling for a complete shutdown of all Muslims entering the country”. This was followed up by Rudy Guilanni saying in an interview that Trump had come to him and asked him to put together something on a Muslim ban that he could use. The courts relied on both the text of Trump’s order and Trump’s and his associates statements about what they were attempting to do. If anyone shot themself in the foot, it was your Mr Trump.
              Your problem is not that I have been listening to FAKE NEWS, it is that I listen to the news, the real news. Not the far right crazies, not the far left crazies, the REAL NEWS. Until there is a shortage of recording media Trump will always be in trouble. You can’t make a statement publicly one day and contradict yourself the next day and expect it not to catch up you. That is the way Trump operates.

              I suppose that to someone like you, the idea of a religious test is acceptable. I just wonder how you would react if it was a nonchristian authority questioning your right to believe as, or live as a Christian.
              I will continue to be a good American, and call out you, or anybody like you who blindly follows the traitor and Russian lover who is stinking up our Whites House.

              By the way, you name calling is as juvenile as ever, and your emojis just as infantile as ever.

Comments are closed.