A little truth about President Trump’s Immigration Executive Order
Something as emotional and personal as immigration has exploded into a hysteria-filled argument within our media and across the national landscape. Our media certainly has failed it’s role in adequately vetting the stories and facts around this order. It’s time for a little truth about the controversial executive order about immigration signed by President Trump a few days prior.
The executive order does not reference a single country other than Syria. Did that surprise you? This executive order does not create any new law in this regard, it simply applies the executive order to countries identified by the Obama Administration. These countries are not explicitly defined but can be broadly interpreted to the following (2): Iraq or Syria, Countries that have supported state-sponsored terrorism, Countries deemed ‘areas of concern’ by the Secretary of Homeland Security.
The initial order applied to 7 countries reported in the news (Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Sudan, Yemen, and Somalia). These are all countries without functioning governments or governments that have been highly compromised due to ongoing conflict or unrest. This seems like a rational list.
Claims that the executive order skips countries with Trump business ties is true, but it’s correlation, not causality. These countries, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, and U.A.E. have been floated in the media as a potential conflict of interest however it is much more likely that they were not targeted because they all have functioning governments that cooperate with our intelligence and border protection teams.
This is not permanent, it only lasts 90 days. That’s right, this is hardly a ‘ban’ as it is referred to in the press and also, unfortunately, colloquially by President Trump himself during the campaign. It is simply a pause in visa requests and immigration until certain vetting procedures are put in place or improved over existing procedures (3). It has been widely acknowledged by key National Security leaders during past administrations that our vetting procedures needed significant improvements (4)
Greencard holders and Iraqi cooperators were not explicitly called out in this EO causing confusion for 3 days. This has been a source of much outrage in the media as stories about an Iraqi translator being detained and small children get views quickly. However, this is largely overblown and the executive order specifically grants security personnel to treat these individuals on a case-by-case basis (5) and should have been followed. In addition, most of these individuals were detained for several hours which is hardly unusual for an international traveler coming the Middle East.
In addition, later clarifications were made that specifically sharpened the policy above for greencard holders as well as Iraqi translators.
It’s important in these hysteria-filled times, that an objective eye and reading of important orders such as this are looked at rationally and to understand both the human as well as the legal necessities of such an order. While people may disagree with some of the more emotional aspects of preventing individuals temporarily from certain countries, it is fully within the jurisdiction and authority given to the POTUS from our Constitution.
References
(1) Trump Whitehouse Executive Order text: https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/27/executive-order-protecting-nation-foreign-terrorist-entry-united-states
(2) Countries referenced in Section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12), the Obama signed bill:
(i) the alien has not been present, at any time on or after March 1, 2011 —
(I) in Iraq or Syria;
(II) in a country that is designated by the Secretary of State under section 6(j) of the Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. 2405) (as continued in effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.)), section 40 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2780), section 620A of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2371), or any other provision of law, as a couuntry [sic], the government of which has repeatedly provided support of acts of international terrorism; or
(III) in any other country or area of concern designated by the Secretary of Homeland Security under subparagraph (D);
(3) Text regarding the development of a new screening/vetting process:
This program will include the development of a uniform screening standard and procedure, such as in-person interviews; a database of identity documents proffered by applicants to ensure that duplicate documents are not used by multiple applicants; amended application forms that include questions aimed at identifying fraudulent answers and malicious intent; a mechanism to ensure that the applicant is who the applicant claims to be; a process to evaluate the applicant’s likelihood of becoming a positively contributing member of society and the applicant’s ability to make contributions to the national interest; and a mechanism to assess whether or not the applicant has the intent to commit criminal or terrorist acts after entering the United States.
(4) Some testimony from National Security Committee members about the inadequacies of US Immigrant/Refugee vetting: https://homeland.house.gov/press/nations-top-security-officials-concerns-on-refugee-vetting/
(5) Text from the executive order about case-by-case exemptions:
(g) Notwithstanding a suspension pursuant to subsection © of this section or pursuant to a Presidential proclamation described in subsection (e) of this section, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security may, on a case-by-case basis, and when in the national interest, issue visas or other immigration benefits to nationals of countries for which visas and benefits are otherwise blocked.
