With the expiration of the current travel ban, the United States issued new travel ban s restrictions, this Sunday September 24th. Originally what many called the Muslim Ban 2.0 refused and targeted the travel of those from several muslim-majority countries for four months. Specifically, these countries had included Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.
The new travel ban provisions apply to new countries: Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Syria, Venezuela and yemen. It has been noted by opponents to original travel ban that there is no focus on muslim-majority countries as done before. The new ban has been described to be “indefinite and "conditioned based, not timed based,” unlike the previous 90 day ban.
This change in immigration policy is narrowly tailored to each country involved, whereas previous ban’s provisions were complete and total. These differentiations would be based upon “on cooperation with American security mandates, the threat the United States believes each country presents and other variables” reported by counselor to acting Homeland Security Secretary Elaine Duke, Miles Taylor. The restrictions reportedly are extensive, from “full travel bans on nationals from countries like Syria to more targeted restrictions to a suspension of non-immigrant visas to citizens for venezuela's senior government officials and their immediate families.” The specifics concerning particular countries are displayed by the image above.
How were these listed countries were chosen? DHS created the travel ban limitations based on their compliance with the united state’s benchmarks: issuance of electronic passports, biometric information, and information concerning traveller’ criminal histories.
Some critics believe this is just a glorified muslim ban.
The exemption which allowed entrance based on bona fide relationships- credible close familial ties- will cease to exist. However, those with existing valid visas and green card’s travels will not be prohibited and airport issues will be limited as result of months of joint efforts.
Many believe that although Trump has added non-muslim countries to the list, the ban is inherently immoral or bad, no matter what other countries he adds to the list. Senior Lauren Banks said, “I don’t know much, but what I do know? It’s not right to pick countries based on people’s religion. But then again, if it's because of security reasons and those countries have shown that they can’t be trusted, it’s fair game.”
These new provisions do not go into effect until October 18th, after the supreme court was originally set to hear the arguments concerning legality of the ban on October 10th. The Supreme Court announced that it will not be hearing oral arguments as schedule, as a result of Donald Trump's statements. According to New York Times, “The Supreme Court asked lawyers in the case involving the previous ban to submit briefs by Oct. 5 addressing whether, or to what extent, the proclamation may render the case moot.” Only time will tell the future of the united state’s immigration policy!