What to Know About Trump's New Travel Ban
President Donald Trump on Wednesday announced a travel ban on citizens of 12 countries, mostly in Africa and the Middle East, aiming to prevent or severely limit their entry to the United States.
The policy is similar to a ban that Trump put into effect in 2017, during his first term. It is the latest move in the administration's crackdown on immigration and was set to take effect Monday.
What countries are on the list?
A full travel ban will affect citizens of the following countries:
-- Afghanistan
-- Chad
-- Republic of Congo
-- Equatorial Guinea
-- Eritrea
-- Haiti
-- Iran
-- Libya
-- Myanmar
-- Somalia
-- Sudan
-- Yemen
Partial restrictions will apply to citizens of other countries, meaning they cannot come to the country permanently or apply for certain visas. They are:
-- Burundi
-- Cuba
-- Laos
-- Sierra Leone
-- Togo
-- Turkmenistan
-- Venezuela
What is the administration saying?
Trump, who announced the ban in a proclamation, said it was intended to protect 'the national security and national interest of the United States and its people.' It is his latest effort to further restrict immigration since returning to office in January, coming after his administration blocked asylum-seekers at the southern border, barred international students from Harvard University and ordered immigration raids across the country.
Cabinet officials in April had identified a list of countries where vetting and screening information surrounding visa applicants was 'deficient' enough to warrant a full or partial suspension, the action said.
The order accused many countries of the list of exploiting the U.S. visa system and failing to cooperate with the United States on deportations. The action said citizens of some countries had a higher risk of overstaying their visas, which added to burdens on law enforcement agencies.
The announcement came days after an Egyptian man who overstayed his visa was arrested in Colorado and charged with attacking a group honoring hostages being held in the Gaza Strip. But Egypt is not subject to the ban.
What are the exceptions?
The new travel ban does not apply to people with visas who are already in the United States, and it includes a few other exemptions.
For example, Afghans eligible for the Special Immigrant Visa program, which is for those who helped the U.S. government during the war in Afghanistan, are excepted from the ban.
Other exceptions include green card holders, dual citizens and athletes or coaches traveling for a major sporting event held in the United States, like the World Cup or the Olympics.
What are the reactions from the banned countries?
The announcement provoked swift reaction from some of the affected countries.
Venezuela's interior minister, Diosdado Cabello, called the U.S. government 'fascist,' saying that 'being in the United States is a big risk for anybody, not just for Venezuelans.'
The African Union released a statement Thursday expressing concern and noting 'the potential negative impact' the move could have on interpersonal relationships, commerce, education and 'diplomatic relations that have been carefully nurtured over decades.'
Somalia's ambassador to the United States -- whose country Trump's order labeled a 'terrorist safe haven' -- took a more conciliatory approach. The ambassador, Dahir Hassan Abdi, said in a statement that his government was 'ready to engage in dialogue to address the concerns raised.'
The State Department issued about 170,000 visas last year to people from the 12 countries on the list, most of which were nonimmigrant visitor visas for tourism, business or study. That is a small fraction of the millions of visas it issues every year.
How does this compare with the last Trump travel ban?
In 2017, shortly after taking office, Trump announced a ban on travelers from seven mostly Muslim-majority countries. (Five of those countries are on the list again.) The move, announced in an executive order, took effect immediately and caused chaos, with hundreds of travelers being detained at airports. After a legal battle, the Supreme Court eventually permitted a rewritten ban, and the list of countries later evolved. President Joe Biden ended the ban after taking office.
The new ban includes countries in more parts of the world and could affect more people than the bans Trump introduced during his first term.
This time around, Trump's effort is more likely to withstand legal scrutiny, experts said, partly because of a longer lead-up to the announcement and the range of countries affected.
This article originally appeared in The New York Times.
Copyright 2025
Hashtags

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


Hamilton Spectator
41 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Democratic states double down on laws resisting Trump's immigration crackdown
As President Donald Trump's administration targets states and local governments for not cooperating with federal immigration authorities, lawmakers in some Democratic-led states are intensifying their resistance by strengthening state laws restricting such cooperation. In California alone, more than a dozen pro-immigrant bills passed either the Assembly or Senate this week, including one prohibiting schools from allowing federal immigration officials into nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant. Other state measures have sought to protect immigrants in housing, employment and police encounters, even as Trump's administration has ramped up arrests as part of his plan for mass deportations. In Connecticut, legislation pending before Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont would expand a law that already limits when law enforcement officers can cooperate with federal requests to detain immigrants. Among other things, it would let 'any aggrieved person' sue municipalities for alleged violations of the state's Trust Act. Two days after lawmakers gave final approval to the measure, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security included Connecticut on a list of hundreds of 'sanctuary jurisdictions' obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws. The list later was removed from the department's website after criticism that it errantly included some local governments that support Trump's immigration policies. States split on whether to aid or resist Trump Since taking office in January, Trump has enlisted hundreds of state and local law enforcement agencies to help identify immigrants in the U.S. illegally and detain them for potential deportation. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement now lists 640 such cooperative agreements, a nearly fivefold increase under Trump. Trump also has lifted longtime rules restricting immigration enforcement near schools , churches and hospitals, and ordered federal prosecutors to investigate state or local officials believed to be interfering with his crackdown on illegal immigration. The Department of Justice sued Colorado, Illinois and New York, as well as several cities in those states and New Jersey , alleging their policies violate the U.S. Constitution or federal immigration laws. Just three weeks after Colorado was sued, Democratic Gov. Jared Polis signed a wide-ranging law expanding the state's protections for immigrants. Among other things, it bars jails from delaying the release of inmates for immigration enforcement and allows penalties of up to $50,000 for public schools, colleges, libraries, child care centers and health care facilities that collect information about people's immigration status, with some exceptions. Polis rejected the administration's description of Colorado as a 'sanctuary state,' asserting that law officers remain 'deeply committed' to working with federal authorities on criminal investigations. 'But to be clear, state and local law enforcement cannot be commandeered to enforce federal civil immigration laws,' Polis said in a bill-signing statement. Illinois also has continued to press pro-immigrant legislation. A bill recently given final approval says no child can be denied a free public education because of immigration status — something already guaranteed nationwide under a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision . Supporters say the state legislation provides a backstop in case court precedent is overturned. The bill also requires schools to develop policies on handling requests from federal immigration officials and allows lawsuits for alleged violations of the measure. Legislation supporting immigrants takes a variety of forms Democratic-led states are pursuing a wide range of means to protect immigrants. A new Oregon law bars landlords from inquiring about the immigration status of tenants or applicants. New laws in Washington declare it unprofessional conduct for bail bond agents to enforce civil immigration warrants, prohibit employers from using immigration status to threaten workers and let employees use paid sick leave to attend immigration proceedings for themselves or family members. Vermont last month repealed a state law that let law enforcement agencies enter into immigration enforcement agreements with federal authorities during state or national emergencies. They now need special permission from the governor to do so. As passed by the House, Maryland legislation also would have barred local governments from reaching immigration enforcement agreements with the federal government. That provision was removed in the Senate following pushback from some of the seven Maryland counties that currently have agreements. The final version, which took effect as law at the start of June, forbids public schools and libraries from granting federal immigration authorities access to nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant or 'exigent circumstances.' Maryland Del. Nicole Williams said residents' concerns about Trump's immigration policies prompted her to sponsor the legislation. 'We believe that diversity is our strength, and our role as elected officials is to make sure that all of the residents within our community — regardless of their background — feel safe and comfortable,' Williams said. Many new measures reinforce existing policies Though legislation advancing in Democratic states may shield against Trump's policies, 'I would say it's more so to send a message to immigrant communities to let them know that they are welcome,' said Juan Avilez, a policy associate at the American Immigration Council, a nonprofit advocacy group. In California, a law that took effect in 2018 already requires public schools to adopt policies 'limiting assistance with immigration enforcement to the fullest extent possible.' Some schools have readily applied the law. When DHS officers attempted a welfare check on migrant children at two Los Angeles elementary schools in April, they were denied access by both principals. Legislation passed by the state Senate would reinforce such policies by specifically requiring a judicial warrant for public schools to let immigration authorities into nonpublic areas, allow students to be questioned or disclose information about students and their families. 'Having ICE in our schools means that you'll have parents who will not want to send their kids to school at all,' Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener said in support of the bill. But some Republicans said the measure was 'injecting partisan immigration policies' into schools. 'We have yet to see a case in California where we have scary people in masks entering schools and ripping children away,' said state Sen. Marie Alvarado-Gil. 'Let's stop these fear tactics that do us an injustice.' ___ Associated Press writers Susan Haigh, Trân Nguyễn, Jesse Bedayn, John O'Connor and Brian Witte contributed to this report. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Yahoo
44 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump: Ukraine provoked Russian strikes
US President Donald Trump has suggested that Ukraine itself provoked the Russian strikes by conducting Operation Spider's Web. Source: Trump speaking to journalists on board Air Force One Details: Responding to a journalist's question about whether Operation Spider's Web had changed his view of what advantages Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy holds, Trump said it had given Russian leader Vladimir Putin a reason to bomb Ukrainian cities. Quote: "They gave Putin a reason to go in and bomb the hell out of them last night. That's the thing I didn't like about it. When I saw it I said 'Here we go, now it's going to be a strike'." Background: On 1 June 2025, the Security Service of Ukraine carried out a special operation codenamed Pavutyna (Spider's Web) and hit Russian strategic jets at four airfields. Vasyl Maliuk, Head of the Security Service of Ukraine, stated that 34% of strategic carriers of cruise missiles at the main airfields of the Russian Federation had been destroyed. The Security Service of Ukraine officially stated that 41 Russian strategic aircraft had been destroyed by FPV drone strikes, including A-50, Tu-95, Tu-22 M3 and Tu-160 aircraft. The estimated cost of the strategic aircraft destroyed is over US$7 billion. Colonel Ants Kiviselg, Head of the Estonian Defence Forces' Intelligence Centre, reported that the Russian Tu-95 bombers targeted during Operation Spider's Web had been preparing to launch missile strikes on Ukraine. In response to these actions, Russia launched large-scale strikes on Ukraine on the night of 5-6 June, using over 400 drones and 40 cruise and ballistic missiles. The attack resulted in numerous civilian casualties and significant damage to infrastructure. Support Ukrainska Pravda on Patreon!


Washington Post
an hour ago
- Washington Post
Democratic states double down on laws resisting Trump's immigration crackdown
As President Donald Trump's administration targets states and local governments for not cooperating with federal immigration authorities , lawmakers in some Democratic-led states are intensifying their resistance by strengthening state laws restricting such cooperation. In California alone, more than a dozen pro-immigrant bills passed either the Assembly or Senate this week, including one prohibiting schools from allowing federal immigration officials into nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant.