A source of contention during the first 100 days of the Trump presidency has been the White House’s executive order temporarily banning travel from seven Muslim-majority nations with substandard ID compliance procedures and high terrorism rates.
The White House’s decision to halt suspension of refugees from the seven nations has struck a nerve among some activists. The nations affected are: Syria, Iran, Iraq, Somalia, Libya, Sudan, and Yemen.
The travel ban order, as clumsily implemented as it might have been, given its initial barring of permanent residents (“green card” holders), is supported by the majority of the American people. Even most Europeans polled broadly support such travel and immigration bans.
The executive order was nonetheless struck down by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, leading to a furious response from the president.
The White House has prepared a legal response to the Ninth Circuit’s ruling and, in the meantime, has promised modifications to the executive order.
Although the travel ban has been framed by several news media outlets as highly controversial, the temporary barring of travel and immigration from nations is not without precedent.
The Obama administration implemented a similar suspension of processing refugees from the nation of Iraq in 2011. As ABC News reported at the time:
As a result of the Kentucky case, the State Department stopped processing Iraq refugees for six months in 2011, federal officials told ABC News – even for many who had heroically helped U.S. forces as interpreters and intelligence assets
Now, Iraq is precisely the nation taken off the list, according to a forthcoming modification to the policy set by the executive order. As reported by the AP
