[asr]

Trump's most recent travel ban was not "upheld" by the Supreme Court--it was allowed to take effect while legal challenges are pending.[1] At the same time, the Supreme Court instructed the Courts of Appeals hearing the cases to "render [their] decision[s] with appropriate dispatch," presumably so that the Supreme Court can consider the case and issue a final ruling quickly (well, "quickly" in legal time).[2]

Also, it is inaccurate to claim there is "overwhelming evidence" that the ban is not a Muslim ban, and it is an unhelpful ad hominim attack to call anyone who thinks it's a Muslim ban dishonest. The US District Court in Hawaii held that "EO-3 plainly discriminates based on nationality in the manner that the Ninth Circuit has found antithetical to ... the founding principles of this Nation."[3] I.e., it's a Muslim ban. And the Ninth Circuit recently upheld this opinion.[4]

The Supreme Court might overturn the Ninth Circuit decision, but you might want to edit your comment so it's less wrong.

[1] read the article you linked to!!

[2] https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/120417zr1_j4... and https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/120417zr_4gd...

[3] http://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000015f-2bab-d519-a57f-7fabf1...

[4] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/22/us/travel-ban-court.html

[creaghpatr]

>People will dishonestly refer to it as a 'Muslim Ban' despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary

I stand by this statement, as 'Muslim ban' is semantically false; Muslims are not banned from the US. If you can disprove this let me know.