logo
Trump travel ban could damage longstanding relations with African countries, leaders warn

Trump travel ban could damage longstanding relations with African countries, leaders warn

Globe and Mail2 days ago

The latest sweeping travel ban imposed by U.S. President Donald Trump could damage relations with African countries that have taken decades to build, African leaders say.
Mr. Trump announced on Wednesday night that his administration is banning all visits to the United States by citizens from 12 countries, including seven African states. He also introduced restrictions on entry by citizens from seven other countries, including three in Africa.
Trump issues travel ban for a dozen countries set to go into effect Monday
The African Union Commission, the AU's administrative branch, reacted swiftly on Thursday, voicing alarm at the Trump announcement.
It said it was 'concerned about the potential negative impact of such measures on people-to-people ties, educational exchange, commercial engagement, and the broader diplomatic relations that have been carefully nurtured over decades.'
The AU Commission appealed to the Trump administration to adopt a more 'consultative approach' and to engage in dialogue with the affected countries. It urged Washington to act in a 'balanced' and 'evidence-based' manner.
The travel ban, set to take effect on Monday, would ban visitors from Sudan, Somalia, Libya, Chad, Haiti, Afghanistan, Iran, Yemen, Myanmar, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea and Eritrea.
Several countries on this list – including Sudan, Somalia, Myanmar, Yemen and Libya – have suffered huge damage from armed conflicts or militia violence in recent years, with large numbers of refugees fleeing from their wars. In some cases, their official governments do not control all of their territory, making it impossible for them to comply with U.S. demands for screening and vetting of their travellers.
Trump suspends visas for foreign students seeking to attend Harvard
The policy will also increase restrictions on visitors from Burundi, Sierra Leone, Togo, Venezuela, Cuba, Laos and Turkmenistan.
Mr. Trump complained that some countries have deficient screening processes and are reluctant to take back their citizens if they exceed the time limits on their U.S. visas. 'We don't want them,' he said.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Many Canadians losing confidence in future of trade relationship with U.S.: Poll
Many Canadians losing confidence in future of trade relationship with U.S.: Poll

Winnipeg Free Press

timean hour ago

  • Winnipeg Free Press

Many Canadians losing confidence in future of trade relationship with U.S.: Poll

OTTAWA – Almost two in five Canadians say recent court rulings in the U.S., and the ongoing legal battle over President Donald Trump's tariffs, have made them feel less confident in the future of trade relations, a new poll suggests. The poll suggests that 38 per cent of Canadians say they feel less confident now about the future of Canada-U.S. trade as well as trade between the U.S. and other countries. Sixteen per cent of Canadian respondents say they feel more confident, while 37 per cent say their level confidence in the future of the trade relationship hasn't changed. The Leger poll, which was conducted online and can't be assigned a margin of error, surveyed more than 1,500 people between May 30 and June 1. The poll also surveyed more than 1,000 Americans. Their responses to the poll were substantially similar. Thirty-six per cent of American respondents said the recent court rulings and the ongoing legal battle over Trump's tariffs made them feel less confident about the future of trade with Canada and with the rest of the world. Another 19 per cent reported feeling more confident and 31 per cent said their opinion hadn't changed. Trump's tariffs are still hitting most countries around the world after a federal appeals court temporarily paused a decision last week by the U.S. Court of International Trade to block his tariffs. The court said Trump went beyond his authority when he used the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 to take his trade war to the world. A federal appeals court granted the Trump administration's emergency motion for a temporary stay, allowing those tariffs to stay in place for now. The poll suggests that Albertans are reporting the lowest level of confidence in the state of trade relations — 48 per cent of them told Leger they feel less confident about the future of Canada—U.S. and U.S.–international trade relations. That's compared to 38 per cent of Quebecers, 37 per cent of Ontarians and 35 per cent of people in B.C. Among Canadians 55 years of age and older, 43 per cent reported feeling less confident in trade relations; just 33 per cent of Canadians aged 18 to 34 said the same. More women than men said they were losing confidence. While many Canadians expressed concern about the future of trade relationships, many also said the fact that U.S. courts are trying to limit Trump's impact on trade policy increases their trust in America's institutions. The poll suggests that 45 per cent of Canadians say their trust in U.S. democratic institutions has increased, while 17 per cent say it has decreased. Almost a third of Canadians said it has had no impact on their opinion. Quebecers were the most likely to say their trust had increased, at 54 per cent, compared to 45 per cent of people in B.C., 43 per cent of Ontarians and 39 per cent of Albertans. Canadians aged 55 and over were more likely to say their trust had increased than younger Canadians. Among the Americans surveyed, 38 per cent said the fact that U.S. courts are trying to limit Trump's trade powers increases their trust in U.S. democratic institutions. Another 24 per cent said it decreases their trust and 26 per cent said it had no impact on their opinion. Andrew Enns, Leger's executive vice-president for Central Canada, said that if there had been only one ruling — the one that blocked the tariffs — the confidence levels recorded by the poll might have been higher. 'There was a second ruling and I think, if anything, it's left people a bit uncertain about the situation,' Enns said, noting that levels of concern seemed to be higher earlier in the year. 'I think the confidence, it's going to take some time to rebuild that.' The polling industry's professional body, the Canadian Research Insights Council, says online surveys cannot be assigned a margin of error because they do not randomly sample the population. — With files from David Baxter and Kelly Geraldine Malone This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 6, 2025.

The 911 presidency: Trump flexes emergency powers in his second term
The 911 presidency: Trump flexes emergency powers in his second term

Winnipeg Free Press

timean hour ago

  • Winnipeg Free Press

The 911 presidency: Trump flexes emergency powers in his second term

WASHINGTON (AP) — Call it the 911 presidency. Despite insisting that the United States is rebounding from calamity under his watch, President Donald Trump is harnessing emergency powers unlike any of his predecessors. Whether it's leveling punishing tariffs, deploying troops to the border or sidelining environmental regulations, Trump has relied on rules and laws intended only for use in extraordinary circumstances like war and invasion. An analysis by The Associated Press shows that 30 of Trump's 150 executive orders have cited some kind of emergency power or authority, a rate that far outpaces his recent predecessors. The result is a redefinition of how presidents can wield power. Instead of responding to an unforeseen crisis, Trump is using emergency powers to supplant Congress' authority and advance his agenda. 'What's notable about Trump is the enormous scale and extent, which is greater than under any modern president,' said Ilya Somin, who is representing five U.S. businesses who sued the administration, claiming they were harmed by Trump's so-called 'Liberation Day' tariffs. Because Congress has the power to set trade policy under the Constitution, the businesses convinced a federal trade court that Trump overstepped his authority by claiming an economic emergency to impose the tariffs. An appeals court has paused that ruling while the judges review it. Growing concerns over actions The legal battle is a reminder of the potential risks of Trump's strategy. Judges traditionally have given presidents wide latitude to exercise emergency powers that were created by Congress. However, there's growing concern that Trump is pressing the limits when the U.S. is not facing the kinds of threats such actions are meant to address. 'The temptation is clear,' said Elizabeth Goitein, senior director of the Brennan Center's Liberty and National Security Program and an expert in emergency powers. 'What's remarkable is how little abuse there was before, but we're in a different era now.' Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., who has drafted legislation that would allow Congress to reassert tariff authority, said he believed the courts would ultimately rule against Trump in his efforts to single-handedly shape trade policy. 'It's the Constitution. James Madison wrote it that way, and it was very explicit,' Bacon said of Congress' power over trade. 'And I get the emergency powers, but I think it's being abused. When you're trying to do tariff policy for 80 countries, that's policy, not emergency action.' The White House pushed back on such concerns, saying Trump is justified in aggressively using his authority. 'President Trump is rightfully enlisting his emergency powers to quickly rectify four years of failure and fix the many catastrophes he inherited from Joe Biden — wide open borders, wars in Ukraine and Gaza, radical climate regulations, historic inflation, and economic and national security threats posed by trade deficits,' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said. Trump frequently sites 1977 law to justify actions Of all the emergency powers, Trump has most frequently cited the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, to justify slapping tariffs on imports. The law, enacted in 1977, was intended to limit some of the expansive authority that had been granted to the presidency decades earlier. It is only supposed to be used when the country faces 'an unusual and extraordinary threat' from abroad 'to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States.' In analyzing executive orders issued since 2001, the AP found that Trump has invoked the law 21 times in presidential orders and memoranda. President George W. Bush, grappling with the aftermath of the most devastating terror attack on U.S. soil, invoked the law just 14 times in his first term. Likewise, Barack Obama invoked the act only 21 times during his first term, when the U.S. economy faced the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression. The Trump administration has also deployed an 18th century law, the Alien Enemies Act, to justify deporting Venezuelan migrants to other countries, including El Salvador. Trump's decision to invoke the law relies on allegations that the Venezuelan government coordinates with the Tren de Aragua gang, but intelligence officials did not reach that conclusion. Congress has ceded its power to the presidency Congress has granted emergency powers to the presidency over the years, acknowledging that the executive branch can act more swiftly than lawmakers if there is a crisis. There are 150 legal powers — including waiving a wide variety of actions that Congress has broadly prohibited — that can only be accessed after declaring an emergency. In an emergency, for example, an administration can suspend environmental regulations, approve new drugs or therapeutics, take over the transportation system, or even override bans on testing biological or chemical weapons on human subjects, according to a list compiled by the Brennan Center for Justice. Democrats and Republicans have pushed the boundaries over the years. For example, in an attempt to cancel federal student loan debt, Joe Biden used a post-Sept. 11 law that empowered education secretaries to reduce or eliminate such obligations during a national emergency. The U.S. Supreme Court eventually rejected his effort, forcing Biden to find different avenues to chip away at his goals. Before that, Bush pursued warrantless domestic wiretapping and Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered the detention of Japanese-Americans on the West Coast in camps for the duration of World War II. Trump, in his first term, sparked a major fight with Capitol Hill when he issued a national emergency to compel construction of a border wall. Though Congress voted to nullify his emergency declaration, lawmakers could not muster up enough Republican support to overcome Trump's eventual veto. 'Presidents are using these emergency powers not to respond quickly to unanticipated challenges,' said John Yoo, who as a Justice Department official under George W. Bush helped expand the use of presidential authorities. 'Presidents are using it to step into a political gap because Congress chooses not to act.' Trump, Yoo said, 'has just elevated it to another level.' Trump's allies support his moves Conservative legal allies of the president also said Trump's actions are justified, and Vice President JD Vance predicted the administration would prevail in the court fight over tariff policy. 'We believe — and we're right — that we are in an emergency,' Vance said last week in an interview with Newsmax. 'You have seen foreign governments, sometimes our adversaries, threaten the American people with the loss of critical supplies,' Vance said. 'I'm not talking about toys, plastic toys. I'm talking about pharmaceutical ingredients. I'm talking about the critical pieces of the manufacturing supply chain.' Vance continued, 'These governments are threatening to cut us off from that stuff, that is by definition, a national emergency.' Republican and Democratic lawmakers have tried to rein in a president's emergency powers. Two years ago, a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the House and Senate introduced legislation that would have ended a presidentially-declared emergency after 30 days unless Congress votes to keep it in place. It failed to advance. Similar legislation hasn't been introduced since Trump's return to office. Right now, it effectively works in the reverse, with Congress required to vote to end an emergency. 'He has proved to be so lawless and reckless in so many ways. Congress has a responsibility to make sure there's oversight and safeguards,' said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., who cosponsored an emergency powers reform bill in the previous session of Congress. He argued that, historically, leaders relying on emergency declarations has been a 'path toward autocracy and suppression.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store