What Is Donald Trump's Travel Banned?

Primarily the violence and turmoil is concentrated in the Darfur region of the Sudan. It is estimated that 1,000 people are dying each day in the Sudan, and given the apathetic mindset of the world, hundreds of thousands will continue to die if not helped.

Syria’s civil war is the worst humanitarian crisis of modern time. The “Syrian Civil war Began in March of 2011, between rebel brigades and government force; economy and infrastructure is destroyed” (Library, 2016). “Divisions between secular and religious fighters, and between ethnic groups, continue to complicate the politics of the conflict” (Corps, 2016). Additionally, the Syrian civil war has taken a significant

In attempts to protect the United States from foreign terrorists, President Trump has banned seven different countries from any access into the country for ninety days. The seven countries included in the Travel Ban are Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen (Jackson). As for Syria, Trump has placed a ban that has an undetermined length of time. Another aspect of the ban is, “The order also introduces a cap of 50,000 refugees to be accepted in 2017, against a limit of 110,000 set by former President Barack Obama” (BBC). This order not only drastically affects the amount of immigrants entering the country, but also the number of refugees.

For many ongoing years now, Syria has been in a war with thousands of fleeing refugees, terrorists that could be attacking at any minute, and the constant involvement of other countries that has done more harm than their planned good. I believe that the foreign involvement of countries such as the US and Russia have fueled more of the ongoing violence in Syria.

President Donald J. Trump has issued an executive order that has banned immigrants from entering the United States of America. Enacting this prohibition would damage America’s reputation as the melting pot that we once were. A group of presidents of leading American colleges and universities wrote a letter urging Donald Trump to rectify the recent executive order. The authors use different strategies such as ethos, emotional appeal, and logos to persuade Donald J. Trump to rectify the executive order banning immigrants from the United States.

In The New York Times’ article called “Trump’s Immigration Ban Is Illegal” published on January 27th, 2017, David J. Bier expresses his personal opinion about the execute order signed by Trump that supports to bar all permanent immigration from seven majority-Muslim countries. According to Bier, the order is illegal, since Congress outlawed all discrimination against immigrants and American citizens based on nationality, race, sex, place of birth, or place of residence by means of The Immigration and National Act of 1965. However, Bier explains that the 1965 law does not ban discrimination based on religion, which was Mr. Trump’s original proposal. The author uses examples to prove that presidents have used their powers many times to forbid

On January 27, 2017, President Trump issued an executive order that suspended entry of all refugees into the United States for one-hundred and twenty days. The order obstructed Syrian refugees for an unspecific time and blocked entry into the United States for ninety days for citizens of seven Muslim countries, such as: Sudan, Libya, Somalia, Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Yemen. This order also banned green card holder from these seven countries.

The issue of illegal immigration has become a major debate for everyone. June Johnson wrote “Crossing Borders: Immigration” in her book Global Politics, Local Arguments to introduce the topic of undocumented immigrants in the U.S expanding and the measures that the government has taken to solve the problem. In Chapter 4, Johnson presented Victor Davis Hanson, who wrote “Illegal Immigration Is Immoral” to expose how the proposals to fix illegal immigration has lost all moral credibility. Krishnadev Calamur wrote “What Trump’s Executive Order on Immigration Does-and Doesn’t Do.” on Jan 30, 2017 in The Atlantic to expose the impact that Trump’s Executive Order 1187 to ban the citizens of seven Majority-Muslim

Regarding Erwin Chemerinsky’s article from January 29, 2017, “Op-Ed Trump's cruel, illegal refugee executive order,” I am happy to see this issue raised publicly. I believe Trump’s banned order is unacceptable because it is discriminate, unconstitutional, and inhumane. Firstly, it is discriminate because no one should be banned from entering the Unit States of America base on the nationality. This means any banned nationals with immigrants are not allowed and discriminated with voided visa. Secondly, it is unconstitutional because this order is breaking the first amendment which allows an individual’s region should not favor over another. In the article, Trump also told Christian news that will give Christians a greater help. Thirdly, it is

In America, there is a major topic being debated; Donald Trump’s immigration bans. The Justice Department and “attorneys general” are in a heated debate about whether these bans are constitutional or not. The Justice Department’s position is that as President, he has both constitutional and legal authority to pull off these actions. According to the act President Harry S. Truman passed in the second article, “... the president [has] the power to suspend or impose restrictions on the entry of foreign nationals if he determines their entry ‘would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.’” (usatoday.com). By passing this act, the President has the power to issue orders as long as it is for the better of the people.

Syria is located on the middle east and is really close to Europe or the area where we call Eurasia. It shares border with Jordan, Iran, Iraq and Turkey. For the problem, it began in early 21st century, Syria have encountered a civil war which has affected everything in the country, from the very basic needs to the serious issues.

The third article is about Trumps travel ban and how the Justice Department says that the president has some powers to act unilaterally when it comes to immigration and national security. The Justice Department urges the courts to allow Trump’s immigration order to go back into effect. While the opposing side says that the Trump overstepped by banning people from specific countries and of the Muslim religion. They also stated that Trump has violated core principles of the Constitution and ignored laws passed by Congress. Trumps goal for the travel ban was to improve the background checks to make sure terrorists are not admitted accidently. The order was blocked by the U.S. District Judge James Robart, the government appealed asking to reinstate

Businesses that are involved in global practices, whether they send their employees abroad, or they are just in connection with other countries in the world, they could face negative consequences from a travel ban being placed in the United States. As John Wasik points out, businesses could be affected by not having the ability to get their employees to certain countries to do business, or countries may aim their retaliation at U.S. businesses for these restrictions. Wasik also points out that countries may not buy U.S. goods or may place an extra tax on U.S. imports, which will hurt our economy and businesses that sell those products. The ban will cause shifts in our economy, which would affect U.S. businesses, especially those that are publicly traded. This will prevent people from being able to or choosing to come to America to seek new business ventures and bring their talents to our economy (Wasik). It will stall our economy's growth, and have a negative effect on the country as a whole.

On Facebook, I sought out opinions on this social justice issue by searching through public postings for the hashtags #travelban, #muslimban, #nobannowall, #refugees, #Americafirst, and #buildthewall. The vast majority of views presented by those using these hashtags were against the ban. One common theme held by those against the ban is that it was discriminatory. By adding Venezuela and North Korea to the list, the social media opinion is that Trump is trying to distract from it being a racist ban targeting Muslims. For example, Aram Shahinfard (2017) states in his Facebook update, “So he added a few more countries to make it a not-muslim ban? It is still not acceptable!” His Facebook friend,

Be it resolved that the United States fully repeals the travel ban due to the discriminatory effects it has on some people. The travel ban is a terrible executive order that was put into place by President Trump on january 27th of 2017. The travel ban was put into place to protect the United States by not allowing any citizen from seven muslim countries to enter. These seven countries are; Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. These countries were targeted due to supposed risks of these countries harboring extremists groups such as Isis or Al-qaeda. According to the article “Trump's executive order: Who does travel ban affect?,” by BBC News, “ The travel ban suspensions the US refugee program for 120 days, places and indefinite ban on Syrian refugees and suspends all visas of incoming immigrants of the seven banned countries” (BBC News). The seven countries are heavily muslim, however most of the people in these countries are no threat to the United States in any way. Why is the United States completely discriminating the islamic religion when we are founded on the basis of religious freedom. Not everyone who is muslim is a terrorists so why are we punishing a lot of good people for the actions of very few. Most of the terrorist attacks that have happened since 9/11 have been carried out by a U.S citizen, so are we going to start deporting all muslim U.S citizens? The islamic religion is not the problem it's the radicalistic idea that some people