logo
Trump signs ban on citizens entering the US from 12 countries, including Iran, Haiti and Afghanistan

Trump signs ban on citizens entering the US from 12 countries, including Iran, Haiti and Afghanistan

Irish Times2 days ago

US president
Donald Trump
has signed a sweeping order
banning travel
from 12 countries and restricting travel from seven others, reviving and expanding the travel bans from his
first term
.
The nationals of Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen will be 'fully' restricted from entering the US, according to the proclamation.
Meanwhile, the entry of nationals of Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela will be partially restricted.
The US president said that he 'considered foreign policy, national security, and counterterrorism goals' in deciding the scope of the ban. Mr Trump had cued up the ban in an executive order signed on January 20th, his first day back in the White House, instructing his administration to submit a list of candidates for a ban by March 21st.
READ MORE
Mr Trump has cited a range of justifications for the bans, including national security and concerns that visitors from those countries are overstaying their visas.
But advocates and experts have said that blanket travel bans discriminate against groups of people based on ethnicity alone. They will likely result – as the travels bans did during Mr Trump's first term – in the separation of families.
The bans on travel from Haiti, Cuba and Venezuela could be especially impactful in US communities with huge immigrant populations from those countries.
'This discriminatory policy, which limits legal immigration, not only flies in the face of what our country is supposed to stand for, it will be harmful to our economy and communities that rely on the contributions of people who come to America from this wide range of countries,' said Pramila Jayapal, a Democratic representative of Washington.
The decision to ban travel from these countries comes amid a wave of hardline immigration policies that Mr Trump has issued, including the blocking of asylum claims at the southern border and cancelling temporary protected status for immigrants from a number of countries facing deep humanitarian crises.
The president has also signed a proclamation to restrict foreign student visas at Harvard University and ordered US consulates to conduct social media screening of every visa applicant seeking to travel to the university.
In a video message released on social media, Mr Trump said he was making good on a promise to act following the recent attack at a Boulder, Colorado, event showing support for Israeli hostages.
The attack by an Egyptian national 'underscored the extreme dangers posed to our country by the entry of foreign nationals who are not properly vetted, as well as those who come here as temporary visitors and overstay their visas. We don't want them,' he said.
Mr Trump added that the list was 'subject to revisions based on whether material improvements are made' and that 'likewise, new countries could be added as threats emerge around the world'.
Having instituted a travel ban on Muslim countries early in his first term, the president flagged his plans for a new ban during his election campaign against Kamala Harris last year.
'I will ban refugee resettlement from terror-infested areas like the Gaza Strip, and we will seal our border and bring back the travel ban,' Mr Trump said in September. 'Remember the famous travel ban? We didn't take people from certain areas of the world. We're not taking them from infested countries.'
He was referring to the ban he imposed after taking office in January 2017, leading to chaos at airports as protesters and civil rights attorneys rushed to help affected travellers.
Mr Trump said the ban was needed to combat terrorist threats. It was blocked by federal courts on civil liberties grounds but the US supreme court, to which Mr Trump would eventually appoint three hardline rightwing justices, allowed the ban to stand.
The supreme court said his ban did not target Muslims – despite the fact it originally targeted travellers from Chad, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen, Muslim-majority countries. According to the court, the ban fell within the remit of a president's national security powers. North Korea and Venezuela were also included.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (Cair) said then: 'The Muslim ban's bigotry should have been as clear to the supreme court as it is to the Muslims demonised by it. Apparently, everyone but the supreme court can see the decision for what it is: an expression of animosity.'
In 2020, shortly before the Covid pandemic drastically reduced world travel, Eritrea, Kyrgyzstan, Nigeria, Myanmar, Tanzania and Sudan were added to the ban.
In 2021, that travel ban was among measures Joe Biden ended within hours of being sworn in as Mr Trump's White House successor.
The 2017 ban initially targeted seven predominantly Muslim countries before expanding to include North Korea and Venezuela. This new proclamation is broader and also makes the notable addition of Haiti.
During his 2024 campaign for the presidency, Mr Trump amplified false claims made by his running mate, JD Vance, that Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio were 'eating the pets of the people that live there'. The proclamation falsely claims that 'hundreds of thousands of illegal Haitian aliens flooded into the United States during the Biden administration' and this 'influx harms American communities'.
In fact, about 200,000 Haitians were granted temporary protected status, which gives legal residency permits to foreign nationals who are unable to return home safely due to conditions in their home countries.
Also notable are the restrictions on Afghans, given that many of the Afghans approved to live in the US as refugees were forced to flee their home country as a result of working to support US troops there, before the full withdrawal of US forces in 2021. The agreement with the Taliban to withdraw US troops was negotiated by Mr Trump during his first term.
Last month, homeland security secretary Kristi Noem announced 'the termination of temporary protected status for Afghanistan', effective May 20th. – Guardian

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Philip Bump: Elon Musk has already lost the war as Republicans rally behind Donald Trump
Philip Bump: Elon Musk has already lost the war as Republicans rally behind Donald Trump

Irish Independent

timean hour ago

  • Irish Independent

Philip Bump: Elon Musk has already lost the war as Republicans rally behind Donald Trump

No one really knows where the billionaire and the president will go from here ©Washington Post There is only one person who is unquestionably able to both maintain a high level of public visibility and stay on president Donald Trump's good side. That person is Donald Trump. Everyone else who sidles up to him suffers from the deficit that they are not Trump himself. They therefore risk discovering that Trump has suddenly turned against them, bringing his fervent base of support – tens of millions of Americans strong – with him. Options from that point are limited: obsequious efforts at reintegration with the president or lining up for one of the modest but endless slots reserved in the public conversation for Trump's former allies.

Colin Sheridan: Manscaping of society has gone on for far too long
Colin Sheridan: Manscaping of society has gone on for far too long

Irish Examiner

time2 hours ago

  • Irish Examiner

Colin Sheridan: Manscaping of society has gone on for far too long

Considering the latest bromantic melodrama emanating from the sadistic reality TV show that is the USA, I'm thinking of writing a non-fiction book called The Penis Apologist in which I make a case that men should not be allowed to run for public office for a century — at least. The ban would be worldwide, and effective immediately. Where snap elections cannot take place, the closest female relative to the outgoing official's nemesis will be jettisoned in until a plebiscite is possible. In the case of Keir Starmer, for example, Jeremy Corbyn's wife would take charge. Their qualifications are irrelevant, just as they've been irrelevant for men. The same standard will apply to the general staff of all militaries. I understand there will be considerable pushback to this idea from all sides. From the feminists, who might argue that I am appropriating the legacy trauma of women everywhere. From the Andrew Tate acolytes, who will argue treachery to a non-existent brotherhood. From the centrists, who will accuse me of flagrant populism and suggesting I have hopped aboard a bandwagon — or a fallopian flotilla — all in the name of ingratiating myself to the sisterhood. To all of them, I simply say: This isn't working The manscaping of society has gone on for far too long and the results of the masculine monopoly have proven to be much too disastrous for humankind, for the planet, for the arts, culture, and academia. The only thing men have not ruined all by themselves is sport — both the watching of it and the playing of it. That, and drinking silently in pubs. Literally every other thing has been tainted to some degree by an inglorious arms race between men intent on one thing: Winning a big micky contest. The cost of that megalomaniac pursuit has been catastrophic. War. Famine. Drought. Climate change. Kanye. And now, in the case of Donald Trump and Elon Musk, a break-up so unedifying they make Kim Kardashian look like Grace Kelly. Women themselves are not entirely blameless. Maggie Thatcher didn't exactly woo the working class with a mother's touch. Kamala Harris may have proven slightly less duplicitous a president than Donald Trump, but she was too incompetent to defeat him. Liz Truss, Suella Braverman, and Priti Patel were nearly as bad as Boris Johnson, which is a quite the reach. Ursula von der Leyen displays all the empathy of a data centre, and I wouldn't trust Giorgia Meloni as far as I could throw her. Closer to home, the nuns — as a collective — did considerable damage, especially to women Despite all of this, I still think men have had the reins for long enough. All its brought us is disaster. As of this year, only 13% of the world's nations are led by women. Historically, only about one third of United Nations member states have ever had a woman serve as head of government. According to UN figures, women hold just 23% of ministerial positions globally in 2025. The same study notes women are more often assigned portfolios related to social affairs, while defence, foreign affairs, and finance remain predominantly the purview of men. In terms of wealth, women constitute approximately 13.3% of the world's billionaires. According to Forbes' rich list published this year, out of 3,028 billionaires globally, only 406 are women. Let's put the diversity, equity and inclusion argument to one side for a moment. Clearly, that was beyond our abilities to properly implement, probably because it was men responsible for it. Perhaps we don't even need to try that hard. Perhaps we should just seek to put the best people in the jobs with the most power. Perhaps, after many millennia of evidence, men are not those people. Perhaps the best people to be in power are those who do not seek it out. 'Unhappy that I am, I cannot heave my heart into my mouth. I love your majesty according to my bond; no more nor less.' So said Cordelia, the youngest of King Lear's daughters, when the narcissistic monarch sought some sycophancy before dividing up his kingdom. Cordelia the character was, of course, a work of Shakespeare's imagination. However, she endures in my mind as the antithesis of what we have come to expect from Trump, Putin, Biden, Boris Johnson, Churchill, Blair, Kennedy, Clinton, Netanyahu, Musk, Bezos et al. If we flipped it entirely, we should really let the children be in charge. We'd eat nothing but Nutella with every meal, but you'd be guaranteed wars would quickly end, the hungry would be fed, and there'd be no such thing as genocide. What is absolutely certain is that they could not do any worse.

Mistakenly deported man Abrego Garcia brought back to US to face criminal charges
Mistakenly deported man Abrego Garcia brought back to US to face criminal charges

Irish Times

time6 hours ago

  • Irish Times

Mistakenly deported man Abrego Garcia brought back to US to face criminal charges

Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the man mistakenly deported from Maryland to El Salvador by the Trump administration , is on his way back to the US to face criminal charges, a person familiar with the matter said on Friday. Abrego Garcia will face charges for allegedly transporting undocumented migrants within the US, ABC reported earlier. The report said the charges had been filed under seal in Tennessee last month, well after Abrego Garcia's March 15th deportation. His lawyers did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Abrego Garcia was deported to El Salvador despite an immigration judge's 2019 order granting him protection from deportation to the country after finding he was likely to be persecuted by gangs if returned there, court records show. READ MORE Critics of president Donald Trump pointed to the erroneous deportation as an example of the excesses of the Republican president's aggressive approach to stepping up deportations. [ Kilmar Abrego Garcia: The story of the 'mistakenly deported Maryland man' Opens in new window ] Officials countered by alleging that Abrego Garcia was a member of the MS-13 gang. His lawyers have denied that he was a member of the gang and said he had not been charged with or convicted of any crime. Kilmar Abrego Garcia. Photograph: Murray Osorio PLLC via AP His case has also become a flash point for escalating tensions between the executive branch and the judiciary , which has ruled against a number of Trump's policies. The US Supreme Court ordered the Trump administration to facilitate Abrego Garcia's return, with liberal justice Sonia Sotomayor saying the government had cited no basis for what she called his 'warrantless arrest'. US District Court judge Paula Xinis has since opened a probe into what, if anything, the Trump administration has done to secure his return, after his lawyers accused officials of stonewalling their requests for information. – Reuters

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