The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld President Trump's controversial travel ban affecting several mostly Muslim countries, offering a limited endorsement of the president's executive authority on immigration in one of the hardest-fought battles of this term. The 5-4 ruling marks the first major high court decision on a Trump administration policy. It upholds the selective travel restrictions, which critics called a discriminatory "Muslim ban" but the administration argued was needed for security reasons.

Fox News @ Night anchor Shannon Bream sits down with Fox News Radio's Guy Benson and Marie Harf to break down the ruling. 

On the dissent comparing the travel ban to Japanese internment camps: There were two different dissents and we had an unusual thing happen today in the court. When they decide an opinion and they announce it usually there's a bit of the majority opinion that's read from the bench, sort of a summary of what it is, the justice who actually wrote it reads.  Occasionally, in a really passionate or heated case someone will read their dissent or a bit of it. Today two dissenting justices. That is exceptionally rare.  (00:30)

On the question of whether the President's previous statements can be used to prove intent with the travel ban: Yeah, it's interesting because they talked about finding whether or not there was a legitimate justification or explanation for what they have done here and they said looking at the text of it the face of it alone they can see that there are legitimate reasons around these issues of national security and about working with these countries that don't want to provide us the proper information. So they turn away from examining the comments. They're certainly outlined all throughout the opinion and the dissent, but they said basically there is enough of a legitimate purpose here that we go with that explanation.  (2:27)

On the pro-life centers ruling: When it comes to the First Amendment this court has been, in recent years and long-term, they have been exceptionally defensive of the First Amendment. I was a little surprised it was 5-4. (6:32)

Listen below: