Modified Trump travel ban does not ease protesters

The original travel ban was an executive order issued by President Donald Trump on Jan. 27, banning travel between America and six different Muslim-majority countries for 90 days: Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen. It also blocked refugees from America for 120 days.

When the first travel ban was announced, much of the public and government were upset and multiple judiciaries from states like New York and Massachusetts filed lawsuits on the ban or tried to block parts of it.

The revised travel ban took effect on March 16, banning immigration from six countries consisting mostly of Muslim people. This new ban excluded Iraq for “diplomatic reasons.” The new ban also has no effect on people with existing green cards or visas, unlike the original order, which barred immigrants from the stated seven countries regardless of whether or not they held green cards.

Photo courtesy of Reuters

Immediately following the Trump administration’s executive order of the initial travel ban, American citizens  were outraged; protesters filled the streets and airports particularly in New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Chicago, San Francisco, and Seattle. Attorneys and judges from New York, Maryland, and Massachusetts attempted to block out parts of this ban, causing Trump to form a new one tailored to accommodate the green-card holders and the public’s wishes.

This order states that the government will no longer issue visas to any citizen of the six banned countries, but it will not affect previous visa holders, and will not prevent people already holding visas from entering the country.

After the adjusted order was released, several attorneys from Hawaii including Douglas S. Chin, Clyde J. Wadsworth, and Neal K. Katyal filed a lawsuit against the new ban, preventing true application of the order itself. According to CNN, this lawsuit became applicable nationwide.

With each new event referencing the travel ban, protesters become angrier and have more cause for their discontent, as seen in the videos sweeping the internet of the people of all ages, religions, and ethnicities  getting involved with their community by letting their voice be heard.

When people were complaining about Trump’s newly improved order at a rally in Nashville, he responded by calling it a “watered-down version of the first order” which he believed “never should have been blocked to start with”.

“And let me tell you something, I think we ought to go back to the first one and go all the way, which is what I wanted to do in the first place,” Trump said.

This view is shared by many Republicans, but Democrats have vocally opposed the travel ban.

“With regard to comparisons to President Obama’s foreign policy decisions, as we’ve heard before, the President fundamentally disagrees with the notion of discriminating against individuals because of their faith or religion,” former president Barack Obama’s spokesman Kevin Lewis said.

As a whole, the public has been coming together and using their right to assemble as given to the people in the First Amendment. However modified this travel ban comes to be, it will leave an effect on the country as it is presently known.

This ban has received a lot of backlash, but it is too soon to see whether it will benefit the country or not.

Written by Sofia Minich

Sofia Minich is a senior and Co-Editor in Chief of the MC SUN. She spends her time driving aimlessly and listening to 90s alt-rock or watching Dazed & Confused.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.