Executive Order Temporarily Banning Entry to the U.S.; What We Know So Far

Donald Trump's immigration order has faced widespread protests and sparked legal challenges. So far, at least four federal judges have halted parts of this order, resulting in several refugees and travelers intending to enter the U.S. not being sent back. U.S. Public Radio has summarized what has happened so far and what may occur in the future, with Radio Farda adding more details based on official statements from the U.S. Departments of State and Homeland Security. 1. Who does the President's order include? This order suspends the acceptance of refugees for 120 days. It sets a cap of 50,000 refugees for this year, significantly lower than the figure set by the Obama administration. It also prohibits the entry of travelers from seven Muslim-majority countries, including Iran, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Somalia, and Libya for 90 days. Border agents and lawyers say the order does not clarify how to treat travelers with green cards, which allow legal residency in the U.S., but subsequent statements from White House officials clarify that this restriction does not apply to these individuals. According to the U.S. State Department, the seven countries whose citizens are subject to this temporary ban were designated by Congress or the Secretary of Homeland Security. The State Department also stated that no visa interviews will take place during the 90-day ban. Another point of ambiguity has been how this order applies to dual nationals. The U.S. State Department stated that dual citizens from the seven countries are also subject to the order, although it emphasized that this order will not change the visa waiver law that applies to citizens of the UK and some European countries. Regarding dual nationals, the State Department said that if the visa of citizens from these seven countries is registered in a passport not belonging to that country, the passport holder will not be able to use it. On Monday, U.S. embassies in several European countries, including the UK, Germany, the Netherlands, Austria, and Italy, informed citizens of the countries subject to the entry ban who also hold citizenship in these European countries not to apply for a U.S. visa until further notice. This statement was later removed from the U.S. Embassy's website in the UK, and the UK Foreign Secretary stated that dual nationals from this country would not face issues traveling to the U.S. 2. What rulings have federal judges issued? The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit against the detention of two Iraqi individuals at JFK airport in Brooklyn, New York. The judge issued a ruling temporarily prohibiting the deportation of about 200 individuals. The judge stated that these individuals would face "irreparable harm" if deported and requested the Trump administration to publish a complete list of refugees and travelers affected by this order. In a subsequent ruling issued by a federal judge in Virginia, it was stated that this group of travelers has the right to contact volunteer lawyers for their defense. Another judge in Massachusetts ruled that not only should these individuals not be deported, but those who have already been detained by federal authorities must be released. Some lawyers representing these individuals say that in some cases, immigration and border enforcement are not complying with these judicial rulings. In this regard, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security stated that it will enforce the federal judge's ruling, but this ruling does not stop the President's order. The Department of Homeland Security's statement said that the federal judge's ruling only pertains to individuals who have entered U.S. territory, and the travel restrictions for citizens of the seven countries and refugees remain in effect. 3. What does the Trump administration say about this? White House officials have stated that the aim of this action is to protect U.S. borders and prevent the entry of individuals suspected of terrorist activities. The Department of Homeland Security stated that on Saturday, less than one percent of the 325,000 individuals who enter the U.S. daily were identified as "undesirable." This agency announced that the implementation of the presidential order will continue, and "the U.S. government will exercise its right to revoke visas for travelers whenever it deems necessary for national security and the protection of the country's people." Reince Priebus, the White House Chief of Staff, stated in an interview with NBC News that this order will not affect green card holders, but added that "they will also be subject to stricter scrutiny at U.S. borders." Regarding green card holders, the Department of Homeland Security stated that on the first day of the order's implementation, 81 individuals entered U.S. airports, and none of them were prevented from entering the country. In this context, CNN reported that those citizens from the seven countries who hold green cards will undergo security screening, including interviews and fingerprinting, upon entry, and if there are no issues, they will be allowed entry. 4. What will the legal challenges be going forward? The President has absolute authority over immigration. Federal laws allow the President to prevent individuals or groups deemed "detrimental" to the country from entering the U.S. However, according to the rewritten law enacted in 1965 known as the "Immigration and Nationality Act," there should be no discrimination based on "race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or residence" in the acceptance or entry of individuals into the country. It appears that Trump's order gives preference to Christians compared to citizens of Muslim countries, although the order notes that the tightening of controls on the entry of citizens from these seven countries was approved and initiated during Obama's presidency. It is likely that in the coming days, lawyers from the American Civil Liberties Union, immigrant rights organizations, and other human rights and civil liberties advocacy groups will submit more complaints to the courts, and their legal arguments will cite the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, the right of all individuals to legal assistance, and the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states that no religion can be preferred over another. White House officials emphasize that the aim of this order was not to create a "ban on Muslims." However, Rudy Giuliani, former mayor of New York and a close associate of Trump, told Fox News that Trump had discussed legalizing such a ban on Muslims with him and others during the 2015 election campaign. Michael Flynn's son, Trump's National Security Advisor, also raised the issue of a "ban on Muslims" in one of his tweets. Advocates for refugee rights can rely on these statements to demonstrate the true intent of the Trump administration. Recently, Trump has repeatedly indicated that his order does not mean a ban on Muslims entering the U.S., while also stating that his country needs stronger borders and maximum scrutiny. He has stated that there are over forty countries with predominantly Muslim populations worldwide that are not affected by this law, and that once they are sure they have reviewed and implemented the safest policies, they will resume issuing visas for all countries. 5. What will be the role of Trump's cabinet officials? Democrats claim that important offices in the U.S. Departments of State and Justice were not aware of the President's immigration order before it was publicly issued. Democrats want to know whether Jeff Sessions, Alabama senator and Trump's nominee for Attorney General, consulted with the President on this issue and whether he will ensure that senior officials in the Department of Justice will be consulted in the future. The Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to review Sessions' nomination on Tuesday. If he receives the necessary votes in this committee, the Senate may confirm his appointment as Attorney General by the end of this week.