(FOX 5 NEWS) - At the much-anticipated oral argument on Wednesday, a divided United States Supreme Court signaled that it just might give its blessing to President Trump's travel ban. The big question before the justices: is Trump's travel ban a legitimate act of national security or unconstitutionally anti-Muslim?
"It does not look at all like a Muslim ban," Justice Samuel Alito said. "There are other justifications that jump out as to why these particular countries were put on the list."
But the president's campaign comments calling for a shutdown of Muslims entering the country loomed large for the court's liberals.
"So let's say in some future time a president gets elected who is a vehement anti-Semite," Justice Elena Kagan said. "And what emerges—and, again, in the context of this virulent anti-Semitism—what emerges is a proclamation that says, 'No one shall enter from Israel.'"
Kagan's hypothetical found an audience with the all-important swing vote, Justice Anthony Kennedy.
"Suppose you have a local mayor and, as a candidate, he makes vituperative hateful statements, he's elected and on Day 2, he takes acts that are consistent with those hateful statements," Kennedy said. "Whatever he said in the campaign is irrelevant?"
The Trump administration's lawyer said that is correct.
But Kennedy also asked some tough questions to the other side.
"Your argument is that courts have the duty to review whether or not there is such a national contingency," Kennedy said. "That's for the courts to do, not the president?"
We usually don't get access to that audio until the end of the week, but the court made an exception due to the very high public interest in the case.
While Kennedy did seem to lean towards the administration during the hour-long argument, we won't know for sure how he or any of the justice will vote until the court announces its decision—likely at the end of June.