The Trump administration has announced that several more countries will be added to its nationality ban in a new presidential proclamation.
Citizens of Kyrgyzstan, Myanmar/Burma, Eritrea, and Nigeria will all be banned from receiving immigrant visas, except special immigrant visas that are available to a very limited number of people, beginning on February 21. Citizens of Tanzania and Sudan will not be allowed to get diversity visas, a type of immigrant visa. Nonimmigrant visas will not be affected. Refugees are not included in this ban since they do not enter the U.S. on immigrant visas.
There are several troubling provisions and claims in this ban. The Immigration and Nationality Act specifically does not allow discrimination based on nationality in issuing immigrant visas for a number of good reasons. No one is dangerous to the U.S. based solely on their nationality. People rarely choose or change their nationality. Nationality doesn’t determine where people live or travel or what other influences come into their lives. According to U.S. government documents, “Citizenship is likely an unreliable indicator” in determining risk in immigration or travel to the US.
In addition, the proclamation claims that citizens of Kyrgyzstan, Nigeria, Sudan, and Tanzania are more likely to engage in “terrorist travel.” No evidence is presented for this assertion, and there is no support for this idea in available sources. These statements are inflammatory.
The proclamation details several reasons why nationals of certain countries should be banned, from the lack of electronic passports and information sharing to this purported risk of increased terrorist travel. But it does not offer any evidence that the lack of an electronic passport or a lower level of information sharing results in national security risks to the U.S.
It is essential to look at the Trump administration’s justification for the ban and determine whether a ban based on nationality addresses their concerns. Yes, Trump and many of his advisors have made racist and offensive statements about the countries facing this ban, but it is difficult to prove that those sentiments are driving this new ban. Instead, we need to hold the Trump administration accountable for the claims made in the proclamation and require it to show that a nationality ban, something that is explicitly not allowed under the INA, is the only method to address the issues the administration says it is facing. The U.S. constantly works with other countries on these issues without resorting to broad immigration bans.
It is important to recognize that a U.S. president has the power to ban classes of people from entering the country. All recent presidents have done so at different times. For example, the president also issued a ban related to the coronavirus outbreak to prevent an outbreak in the U.S. This approach is based on scientific data, including data from the Centers for Disease and Research and the World Health Organization. But the Trump administration’s repeated use of bans is far broader than any previous example, and it should bear the responsibility to prove that an inherently discriminatory ban is the best way to meet its goals.
Yorumlar