
Trump's travel ban has come full circle
All the build-up around immigration in the last 100 days of the second Donald Trump administration has now culminated in the US President's decision to sign an executive order banning the entry of citizens from 12 countries into the US. These countries are Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen. Trump's executive order lists seven additional countries — Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela — for partial restriction of the entry of nationals. The travel ban, in some ways, overlaps with the one in 2017, which the Joe Biden administration eventually reversed. The renewed ban has new facets.
New additions to the list — such as Afghanistan, Myanmar, Republic of the Congo, Haiti, and Turkmenistan — suggest that Trump has focused on entry restrictions on people from regions engulfed in conflict or those reeling from the impact of past ones. This slight shift from the last ban (seen as a 'Muslim' ban) has both security and legal considerations. Trump has invoked national security, counterterrorism, and public safety provisions to justify it.
Specifically, Trump has based his decision on Executive Order 14161, signed on January 20: Protecting the United States from foreign terrorists and other national security and public safety threats. It says that the administration 'must ensure that admitted aliens and aliens otherwise already present in the United States do not bear hostile attitudes toward its citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles, and do not advocate for, aid, or support designated foreign terrorists or other threats to our national security.'
The legal basis for the ban appears to be stronger than the last one. It is expected to withstand legal scrutiny because entry restrictions have now been tied to the broader spectrum of illegal immigration, national security, rising gang violence, visa overstay, the possibility of conflict in other countries reaching the shores of the US, and the alleged rise of antisemitism. In what could turn out to be a strong precedent in this case, the US Supreme Court had upheld Trump's travel ban in 2018.
Although this move was in the pipeline for months, the recent attack in Boulder, Colorado by an Egyptian immigrant on a group of people protesting for the release of the hostages taken by Hamas, may have hastened the decision. Trump's decision to take action against the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua, along with deportations of illegal immigrants with criminal records to high-security prisons in other countries such as El Salvador, also reflects his urgency to revise the socio-political milieu of the US.
Trump has referred to Europe as a case in point and how marked changes have ensued in the continent in the last decade due to mass migration, especially from regions of conflict such as Syria. US Vice President J D Vance's speech at the Munich Security Conference earlier this year exemplified this policy assertion, along with one to deviate from its historical relationship with Europe. It remains to be seen whether the policies of the second Trump administration are consolidated over successive presidencies or if they will be reversed in the next 30-odd months. Apart from the fact that much of the intended policy changes will be contested in US courts, the first serious test will be the midterm elections. Until then, an oversized executive is certainly redrawing the arc of American politics, both at home and abroad.
For a nation built and strengthened by immigrants, some of the Trump administration's immigration and visa policies risk upending the American Dream for millions who look to the US with hope. A policy of bans could also undermine America's competitive edge in skilled labour and manufacturing — especially at a time when Trump is pushing for increased domestic manufacturing and onshoring. While it may be time to revisit some of America's longstanding immigration policies, Trump must be cautious not to compromise security for short-term economic gains, particularly by overlooking states that openly sponsor terrorism, such as Pakistan.
The writer is Visiting Fellow, ORF America and Deputy Director, Strategic Studies Programme, ORF
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Hindustan Times
20 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
After AOC, Savannah Guthrie says Trump-Musk feud is ‘giving 7th grade girl' energy
Savannah Guthrie has shared her brutally honest thoughts about Elon Musk's explosive fallout with Donald Trump. During Friday's episode of Today, the 53-year-old co-host said that their ongoing feud is 'giving 7th-grade girl' energy. 'First of all, to just use TikTok language, it's giving 7th grade girl,' Guthrie said, adding, 'This back and forth, online, and from the Oval Office.' Co-host Craig Melvin laughed at her choice of words, while Meet the Press anchor Kristen Welker said, 'Savannah, you hit the nail on the head.' Also Read: Elon Musk's trans daughter Vivian reacts to his feud with Trump: 'I love…' Guthrie's scathing remark came as Good Morning America's Jonathan Karl revealed a June 6 conversation with Trump, where the president said he is 'not particularly interested' in speaking with Musk. The political correspondent noted that Trump called Musk, 'A man who has lost his mind.' The Today co-host is not the only one to publicly criticise the ongoing spat between Trump and the Tesla CEO. Democratic Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez told Spectrum 1 News on Thursday, saying, 'Oh man, the girls are fighting, aren't they?' Also Read: Jake Paul slams Donald Trump and Elon Musk for 'diss tweeting each other' 'You know, I would say that this was something that was a long time coming, where we've been seeing that these two huge egos were not long for being together in this world as friends,' Ocasio-Cortez went on, adding, 'And so I think this breakup, we've been seeing a long time coming. But we'll see what the impacts are of it legislatively.' Earlier this week, Musk wrote on X, 'I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it.'

The Hindu
29 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Russia calls Ukraine war ‘existential', strikes back
The Kremlin said on Friday (June 6, 2025) the Ukraine war was 'existential' for Russia after it launched a wave of retaliatory drone and missile strikes that killed three rescue workers in Kyiv. The comments are Moscow's latest to dampen hopes for a breakthrough amid a flurry of meetings between Russian and Ukrainian delegations, as well as telephone calls between President Vladimir Putin and U.S. President Donald Trump, aimed at stopping the fighting. On Friday (June 6, 2025) — days after the second round of Ukrainian-Russian ceasefire negotiations in Turkey ended without meaningful progress — the Kremlin cast its three-year invasion as nothing short of a battle for the "future" of Russia. 'For us it is an existential issue, an issue of our national interest, safety, our future and the future of our children, of our country,' Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters, responding to remarks by Mr. Trump on Thursday (June 5, 2025) comparing Moscow and Kyiv to brawling children. Mr. Peskov's comments came shortly after the Russian defence ministry said its forces had launched the "massive" missile and drone strike in "response" to recent attacks by Kyiv on its territory. Ahead of the talks this week in Istanbul, an audacious Ukrainian drone attack damaged nuclear-capable military planes at Russian air bases, including thousands of kilometres behind the front lines in Siberia. Mr. Putin had told Mr. Trump he would retaliate for the brazen operation, 18 months in the planning, in which Ukraine smuggled more than 100 small drones into Russia, parked them near Russian air bases and unleashed them in a coordinated attack. 'A farce' Despite recent rounds of peace talks, Mr. Putin has repeatedly rejected a ceasefire and has instead issued a host of sweeping demands on Ukraine if it wants to halt the fighting. They include completely pulling troops out of four regions claimed by Russia, but which its army does not fully control, an end to Western military support, and a ban on Ukraine joining NATO. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has dismissed the demands as old ultimatums, questioned the purpose of more such talks and called for a summit to be attended by him, Mr. Putin and Mr. Trump. Kyiv said the retaliatory Russian barrage overnight consisted of 45 missiles and 407 drones. AFP journalists heard air raid sirens and explosions ring out over the capital throughout the night. Mr. Zelenskyy, who has repeatedly said Russia wants the war to continue, responded with a call for allies to 'decisively' ramp up pressure on Russia. 'Are we supposed to believe in a ceasefire after today?' Alicia, a Kyiv resident and marketing specialist, told AFP near one of the strike sites in Kyiv. 'I think it's a farce, and it was clear from the very beginning that there would be no truce. Our enemies are not interested in this at all,' she added. Mr. Zelensky said at least three people had been killed in the capital and that Russia had targeted nine regions of Ukraine, including Lviv and Volyn in the west, which border EU and NATO member Poland. In the western city of Lutsk, rescuers in the afternoon pulled the body of a dead man from the rubble of a nine-storey building hit overnight, the interior ministry said.


NDTV
30 minutes ago
- NDTV
'Irreparable Harm' To Career, Family: Detained Columbia Graduate Pleads For Release
Quick Read Summary is AI generated, newsroom reviewed. Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia graduate facing deportation due to his pro-Palestinian activism, details the emotional toll of his detention, missing his child's birth and losing job opportunities. A judge questions the constitutionality of his deportation. New York: A Columbia graduate facing deportation over his pro-Palestinian activism on campus has outlined the "irreparable harm" caused by his continued detention as a federal judge weighs his release. Mahmoud Khalil said in court filings unsealed Thursday that the "most immediate and visceral harms" he's faced in his months detained in Louisiana relate to missing out on the birth of his first child in April. "Instead of holding my wife's hand in the delivery room, I was crouched on a detention center floor, whispering through a crackling phone line as she labored alone," the 30-year-old legal U.S. resident wrote. "When I heard my son's first cries, I buried my face in my arms so no one would see me weep." He also cited potentially "career-ending" harms from the ordeal, noting that Oxfam International has already rescinded a job offer to serve as a policy adviser. Even his mother's visa to come to the U.S. to help care for his infant son is also now under federal review, Khalil said. "As someone who fled prosecution in Syria for my political beliefs, for who I am, I never imagined myself to be in immigration detention, here in the United States," he wrote. "Why should protesting this Israel government's indiscriminate killing of thousands of innocent Palestinians result in the erosion of my constitutional rights?" Department of Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin responded that Khalil should simply self-deport, taking advantage of the administration's offer of $1,000 and a free flight to those in the country illegally that use its CBP Home app. Khalil obtained a green card, but the Trump administration says it is revoking it. Khalil's 13-page statement was among a number of legal declarations his lawyers filed highlighting the wide-ranging negative impacts of his arrest. Dr. Noor Abdalla, his U.S. citizen wife, described the challenges of not having her husband to help navigate their son's birth and the first weeks of his young life. Students and professors at Columbia wrote about the chilling effect Khalil's arrest has had on campus life, with people afraid to attend protests or participate in groups that can be viewed as critical of the Trump administration. Last week, a federal judge in New Jersey said the Trump administration's effort to deport Khalil likely violates the Constitution. Judge Michael Farbiarz wrote the government's primary justification for removing Khalil - that his beliefs may pose a threat to U.S. foreign policy - could open the door to vague and arbitrary enforcement. Khalil was detained by federal immigration agents on March 8 in the lobby of his university-owned apartment, the first arrest under Trump's widening crackdown on students who joined campus protests against Israel's war in Gaza.