President Trump new executive order bans travelers was prepared and executed on Monday that White House officials hope it can withstand legal scrutiny by imposing a 90-day ban on the entry of new visa applicants from six predominantly Muslim countries. Congress.
In addition, the nation’s refugee program will be suspended for 120 days, and will not accept more than 50,000 refugees in a year, below the 110,000 threshold set by the Obama administration.
The new guidelines mention six of the seven countries included in the first executive order but leave out Iraq. That nation will increase cooperation with the United States in additional security research under separate negotiations and its citizens are not subject to the new order, the fact sheet says.
The new order includes other exceptions contained in previous versions: for travelers from those countries who are legal permanent residents of the United States, dual citizenship who use a passport of another country, those who frequent diplomatic missions, and those who have been granted asylum or refugee status. We will try to outline a more robust justification of national security; the card said 300 people who entered the country as refugees were currently the subject of FBI counter terrorism investigations.
“The United States has more generous immigration system in the world, but has been repeatedly exploited by terrorists and other malicious actors who seek to do us harm,” the form indicated.
The order, which is to enter into force on March 16 represents an attempt by the administration Trump new executive order bans travelers and to tighten security requirements for travelers from nations that officials said pose a threat of terrorism. A more radical attempt in January has caused mass protests across the country as travelers en route to the United States were arrested at airports after the order was announced by surprise.
A judge of the Federal District in the state of Washington before suspended a travel ban on February 3, and a three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit subsequently upheld that freeze.
That setback was a blow to the White House, which has been criticized for failing to include legislators and stakeholders in its deliberations.
The revisions to make it more defensible in court – limit the number of people with standing to sue – even if they could not dispel all the concerns raised by judges across the country. The panel of three judges with the Circuit Court of Appeals 9, for example, said that the exemption of green card and visa holders from the current ban would not solve their concern for US citizens with an interest for non-citizens traveling.
The administration also will have to contend with the comments by the president and chief adviser Rudy Giuliani seems to indicate that the aim of the measure was to prohibit Muslims from entering the United States, which might conflict with the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment .
During the election campaign, Trump asked a. “Total and complete shut off of the Muslims enter the US” After the elections, the former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani said: “So when [Trump new executive order bans travelers] first announced that he said, ‘Islamic ban.’ He called me. He said: ‘Put a commission together. Show me the right way to do it legally.’ ”
A federal judge in Virginia reference those comments to order the frozen ban than residents of Virginia and institutions, calling it “unrebutted evidence” that Trump Directive may violate the First Amendment.
The Security Department was preparing to enact public order on Monday morning under an embargo. The Washington Post has received the documents separately by an immigration lawyer who obtained them from a member of Congress.
The new order has drawn condemnation from supporters of immigrant rights.
“The president Trump new executive order bans travelers explains the situation that he would prohibit the Muslims, and this revised version – in these preliminary fact sheet – which is still, even if they removed Iraq from the list,” said Gregory Chen, director of advocacy for the American Immigration Lawyers Association. “In his oral arguments before the 9th Circuit, the government has been able to provide any evidence for the 9th Circuit that acts of terrorism were committed by citizens of seven countries initially designated. This was an embarrassment, but now weeks later, in these preliminary fact sheets, still they have not explained why the people of these countries pose a risk to US national security. “