Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/17pdf/17-965_h315.pdf
Page Number: 45.0

Cite as:  585 U. S. ____ (2018) 

1 

KENNEDY, J., concurring 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 17–965 
_________________ 

DONALD J. TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED 

STATES, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. HAWAII, ET AL. 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 

APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
 

[June 26, 2018] 

JUSTICE KENNEDY, concurring. 
I join the Court’s opinion in full.  
There  may  be  some  common  ground  between  the  opin-
ions in this case, in that the Court does acknowledge that 
in some instances, governmental action may be subject to 
judicial  review  to  determine  whether  or  not  it  is  “inexpli-
cable by anything but animus,” Romer v. Evans, 517 U. S. 
620, 632 (1996), which in this case would be animosity to a
religion.  Whether  judicial  proceedings  may  properly 
continue in this case, in light of the substantial deference
that is and must be accorded to the Executive in the con-
duct of foreign affairs, and in light of today’s decision, is a 
matter  to  be  addressed  in  the  first  instance  on  remand. 
And even if further proceedings are permitted, it would be 
necessary  to  determine  that  any  discovery  and  other  pre-
liminary  matters  would  not  themselves  intrude  on  the 
foreign affairs power of the Executive.

In  all  events,  it  is  appropriate  to  make  this  further 
observation.  There  are  numerous  instances  in  which  the 
statements  and  actions  of  Government  officials  are  not 
subject to judicial scrutiny or intervention.  That does not 
mean those officials are free to disregard the Constitution
and the rights it proclaims and protects.  The oath that all 
officials take to adhere to the Constitution is not confined 
to those spheres in which the Judiciary can correct or even