President Donald Trump's administration is trying all means to convince the Supreme Court to approve the proposed travel ban. However, it remains to be seen whether, the administration gets the required votes to approve the proposal and that too before the court goes on a summer recess by the end of June.

The United States' Supreme Court will be considering the travel ban proposal put forth by President Donald Trump. The travel ban proposal includes six countries, which has a predominant Muslim population. And, President Trump's administration is pushing hard to convince the Supreme Court to grant the emergency request and allow putting into force the travel ban, Reuters reported.

Notably the legal team of President Trump asked nine justices to approve the orders, on Thursday, so that the travel ban is imposed with immediate effect. The travel ban was announced by President Trump on March 6 and since then, it has been a controversial issue. Moreover, the lower courts have also blocked the proposal and stayed the imposition of the travel ban.

The lower courts termed the travel ban to be "animus," a legal term meaning illegitimate prejudice, Bloomberg has learned. Remarkably, the term has been the basis of several cases that Justice Anthony Kennedy handled. And, since he is also a part of the Supreme Court's bench of judges, who will be deciding on the travel ban proposal, his vote might play a pivotal role.

According to the reports, if it so happens that the Supreme Court decides to approve the proposed travel ban, another issue that will need to be resolved is the 90-days period that Trump's ban has sought. Whether the 90 days period will start from the day that the Supreme Court issues an approval or whether it will include the time throughout the litigation, remains to be seen. Moreover, if the second option is decided on, the travel ban is set to expire sometime in mid-June.

It must be mentioned that President Donald Trump has stated that his proposed travel ban aims to prevent terror attacks in the US and thus protect the Americans. However, it has been largely criticized due to its discriminatory nature and flawed reasoning.