Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/17pdf/17-965_h315.pdf
Page Number: 11.0

6 

TRUMP v. HAWAII 

Opinion of the Court 

(e)(ii).  For  countries  that  have  information-sharing  defi-
ciencies  but  are  nonetheless  “valuable  counterterrorism 
partner[s]” (Chad, Libya, and Yemen), it restricts entry of
nationals  seeking  immigrant  visas  and  nonimmigrant 
business  or  tourist  visas.    §§2(a)(i),  (c)(i),  (g)(i).    Because 
Somalia generally satisfies the baseline standards but was 
found  to  present  special  risk  factors,  the  Proclamation
suspends  entry  of  nationals  seeking  immigrant  visas  and 
requires  additional  scrutiny  of  nationals  seeking  nonim-
migrant visas.  §2(h)(ii).  And for Venezuela, which refuses 
to cooperate in information sharing but for which alterna-
tive  means  are  available  to  identify  its  nationals,  the 
Proclamation  limits  entry  only  of  certain  government
officials and their family members on nonimmigrant busi-
ness or tourist visas.  §2(f )(ii).

The  Proclamation  exempts  lawful  permanent  residents 
and  foreign  nationals  who  have  been  granted  asylum. 
§3(b).  It  also  provides  for  case-by-case  waivers  when  a 
foreign  national  demonstrates  undue  hardship,  and  that 
his entry is in the national interest and would not pose a 
threat  to  public  safety.    §3(c)(i);  see  also  §3(c)(iv)  (listing 
examples of when a waiver might be appropriate, such as
if  the  foreign  national  seeks  to  reside  with  a  close  family
member, obtain urgent medical care, or pursue significant 
business  obligations).    The  Proclamation  further  directs 
DHS  to  assess  on  a  continuing  basis  whether  entry  re-
strictions should be modified or continued, and to report to
the President every 180 days.  §4.  Upon completion of the 
first such review period, the President, on the recommen-
dation of the Secretary of Homeland Security, determined
that  Chad  had  sufficiently  improved  its  practices,  and  he 
accordingly  lifted  restrictions  on  its  nationals.    Presiden-
tial Proclamation No. 9723, 83 Fed. Reg. 15937 (2018). 

B 
Plaintiffs  in  this  case  are  the  State  of  Hawaii,  three