This article is more than 5 years old. Information may no longer be current.

ACP: Supreme Court permitting parts of travel ban ‘creates uncertainty’

The June 26 Supreme Court decision to allow parts of President Trump’s travel ban on six Muslim-majority countries to take effect generates uncertainty and unacceptably prohibits immigrants and refugees from entering the United States based on discriminatory criteria, including country of origin and religion, according to a press release issued by ACP.

ACP voiced many concerns and opposition to Trump’s previous orders on immigration earlier in the year, noting that it would pose threats to health care and offering recommendations to ease the impact of the travel ban. ACP remains opposed to the ban, asserting that it violates its policies on nondiscrimination based on gender, race, ethnicity, religion and other factors.

On June 12, ACP and 21 other health professional education and practice organizations filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court that opposed the government’s requests for a stay of injunction against the order banning entry of individuals from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

In the brief, the organizations expressed concern that permitting the executive order to take effect will worsen health professional workforce shortages in the United States, obstruct advances in medical care and constrain collaboration necessary for effective biomedical research and management of global threats to public health.

ACP is hopeful that the Supreme Court will strike down the order when it reconvenes in October to hear the merits of the case.

Disclosure: Healio Internal Medicine was unable to confirm relevant financial disclosures at the time of publication.