"how does this discussion relate unto the Trump plan of refusing immigration temporarily from seven Nations that had been deemed most dangerous by the Obama administration?"
It depends on the circumstances of those who bring suit.  Each person has to have standing and that includes a personal, direct harm of some sort.  Then it gets to the larger issues of constitutionality.  However, there are some serious constitutional issues.  Claiming it is not about religion when past history indicates it is could provide a judge to find the lack of specific language pretextual.  The intent can also be derived from the effect and the effect is against the "majority" religion, ie. violates the Establishment clause for treating "majority" and "minority" religions differently.
"violence propagated by the tiny minority"
That brings about a question of effect as well, ie. there is arguably no rational basis to ban these nations as they hasn't been an actual threat from them in decades in comparison.