SALT LAKE CITY — The 5-4 U.S. Supreme Court ruling upholding the latest version of the Trump administration's travel ban elicited praise Tuesday from most of Utah's congressional delegation as a proper reading of presidential authority.

But a prominent Muslim leader denounced the decision and said those in his Salt Lake congregation believe their religion is being discriminated against.

"Many people came to this country, changed their life, and did a lot of good things in this country," said Imam Yuseff Abdi, who leads the Salt Lake City mosque Madina Masjid. "So why do we have to destroy things we have been building for many, many years?"

The travel ban and the rhetoric behind it has made his fellow Muslims in Salt Lake "feel they are being targeted," Abdi said.

"As American people, we are not happy with that kind of thing," he told KSL.

Abdi — who is a U.S. citizen but is originally from Somalia, one of the countries affected by the travel ban — had his own difficulty traveling back to the United States after a trip to Africa last year. He attributed that experience to being singled out because of his religion, and later sued unsuccessfully in federal court over the ordeal.

Abdi said he is frequently approached by those who have been troubled over how the ban could impact their relationships with family members in the affected countries.

"They want to be with their families. They want their families to visit," Abdi said. "They ask me, 'hey Imam, is it safe, can I travel to my (home) country? ... Are they going to ban me (from coming) back in?'

"So there is fear right now."

But Rep. Chris Stewart, R-Utah, said Tuesday it wouldn't be appropriate to use what is "nothing more than campaign rhetoric" from then-candidate Donald Trump, about banning all Muslim entry into the United States, as ammunition against the travel ban.

"They understood that the lower courts took what was nothing more than campaign rhetoric spoken before Mr. Trump was elected president and mistook it for official administration policy. There is a difference between the two and the Supreme Court recognized this," Stewart said in a statement sent to KSL.

Stewart said the president had an unambiguous authority to issue the travel ban that he did.

"It is clearly the president's prerogative to decide issues of national security. Determining travel preconditions from various nations from around the world clearly falls under the president's national security responsibilities."

The ban prohibits most travel to the United States by citizens of Muslim majority countries Iran, Libya, Syria, Yemen and Somalia, and also imposes narrow restrictions on certain Venezuelan government employees and their families and a blanket ban on North Korea citizens.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion that the travel ban was well within U.S. presidents' considerable authority over immigration and responsibility for keeping the nation safe. He rejected the challengers' claim of anti-Muslim bias that rested in large part on Trump's own tweets and statements over the past three years.

But Roberts was careful not to endorse either Trump's statements about immigration in general or Muslims in particular, including his campaign call for "a complete and total shutdown of Muslims entering the United States."

"We express no view on the soundness of the policy," Roberts wrote.

Related:

High court OKs Trump's travel ban, rejects Muslim bias claim

A sharply divided Supreme Court upheld President Donald Trump's ban on travel from several mostly Muslim countries Tuesday, the conservative majority taking his side in a major ruling supporting his presidential power.

Republican Sen. Mike Lee said the question before the court wasn't whether the order was a good idea, but whether it was within the purview of presidential authority.

"It is not the place of the Supreme Court to question the wisdom of a presidential action, but rather to resolve disputes as to whether such an action was lawful and constitutional," Lee said in a statement to KSL.

"Statutes enacted by Congress give the president broad power to deny entry to individuals from certain countries."

Fellow Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch said the Supreme Court "correctly concluded the order was a lawful exercise of presidential power."

"The Constitution grants the president broad authority to set rules and regulations for entry into the United States, which this order does," Hatch said in a statement.

Lee Lonsberry, spokesman for Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, told KSL that Bishop is "confident the Supreme Court is accurate in its assessment of the president's authority."

"(Bishop) agrees that the president has lawfully exercised the discretion granted him," Lonsberry said.

Reached Tuesday, Rep. John Curtis's office declined to comment, saying more time was needed to review the Supreme Court decision before issuing a reaction. Rep. Mia Love's office also declined to comment when contacted.

Immigration attorney J.J. Despain, with the Wilner & O'Reilly immigration law office in Salt Lake City, said much of the case against the travel ban rested on the argument that Trump's rhetoric about Islam proved religious animus acute enough to taint the executive order in the eyes of the Supreme Court justices.

"It was going to be a question of how much extra information outside (the) executive order itself to include in the decision-making," Despain said.

Catholic Community Services of Utah, which runs immigration and refugee resettlement programs, said Tuesday the ban is "steeped in discrimination and anti-Muslim sentiments, which we fear have now received legitimacy by the ruling."

"In the United States, we have long protected the right to practice religion freely and have a proud legacy of welcoming the stranger regardless of race or religion," the organization said in a statement.

West Valley City-based Latino advocacy group Comunidades Unidas, which frequently speaks out on immigration issues, called the ruling "a direct attack on our values as a state."

"This decision will only further divide our communities and enact policies that fuel hate and instill fear in people who look and pray differently," said Luis Garza, executive director of Comunidades Unidas, in a statement.

Abdi said Tuesday he is doing his best to stay positive for Salt Lake's Muslim community, despite the disappointment of the ruling.

"We should not give up for striving for justice. We should always go for it," Abdi said. "We have a good relationship with our neighbors, and that's my goal, to help people to continue to understand one another."

Contributing: The Associated Press

Related topics