Dare I Say It?

Skip to content

## Trump’s Travel, Refugee Ban

It would have been better if President Trump’s executive order, issued Friday, suspending refugee immigration and banning travel to the U.S. from seven Muslim-majority countries, had been more thoughtfully prepared and more smoothly implemented. It’s also a shame that some innocent people have been caught up in the issue. That being said, the overwrought, hand-wringing reaction by the drama queens in the mainstream media and among some, mostly Democratic, politicians is an obvious attempt to stir up the anti-Trump movement protesters and promote mob rule. The New York Times, and others, characterized the result of the Order as “chaos”. Senator Chuck Schumer managed to appear to fight back tears at a press conference at JFK, vowing to fight the order with “every fiber of my being”. Protests erupted at airports, a park, and in front of the White House. Several other Democratic politicians rushed to get involved in the airport demonstrations and, doubtless, on camera. CNN, in typical melodramatic fashion, described the order as a “seismic move to ban more than 218 million people from the United States…” as though that number of people were lined up at airports in the affected countries waiting to board planes to the U.S.

In fact, according to a NYT article Sunday, officials said approximately 109 travelers were detained at U.S. airports in the first 24 hours after the order took effect, and 173 were stopped from boarding at overseas airports. By Saturday night 81 of the people stopped were given waivers to enter the U.S.. The ACLU, which Saturday successfully obtained a court order blocking deportation of people with visas and or refugees, estimated the order affected 100 to 200 people. Reliable sources say those numbers will increase when all 218 million try to come here.

Some additional facts should be borne in mind when evaluating this issue:

- The order applies to the seven countries identified by the Obama administration as being the most likely sources of terrorists. Many other predominately Muslim countries are not affected, so it would be unreasonable to characterize the ban as anti-Muslim.
- The original order apparently did not specify how U.S. green card holders traveling from these countries would be dealt with. The administration clarified on Sunday that these people were not included in the ban. Granted, it should have been absolutely clear from the start.
- The vetting process for issuance of visas and granting of refugee status has been roundly criticized. Many ‘visa mills’ have been exposed in the U.S. educational system and at least one diplomatic post overseas. In October of 2015, FBI Director Comey, testifying before the Senate Homeland Security Committee, expressed concern regarding “gaps” in information about Syrian refugees that make the screening process problematic.
- In an October, 2016 article on lifezette.com, Matt O’Brien, former chief of the National Security Division within USCIS’ Fraud Detection and National Security Directorate (FDNS), wrote about the agency’s emphasis on volume of immigration applications processed “often at the expense of national security and public safety”. He said that the Obama administration mandated that refugee vetting, which had been taking 18-24 months, be done in 90 days. “Attempting to vet individuals from the most dangerous regions of the world in less than three months is criminally irresponsible.”
- With the exception of the indefinite suspension of Syrian refugee admittance, the ban is temporary, 90 days for travelers and 120 days for refugees.

President Trump deserves credit for keeping his campaign promises and getting down to business, regardless of the political fallout. Despite the clumsiness of the issuance and initial execution of the order, a review of the vetting process is a good idea. It may be found to be entirely adequate, but I would rather know it than hope it is.

It would be even more beneficial if the ban fostered a calm, thoughtful discussion of the immigration and refugee issue in general, not just in regard to potential terrorists. The protesters and politicians opposing this executive order are all talking about how being a sanctuary is what the United States is all about. That certainly is a proud part of our heritage. But, contrary to what the liberals believe, the U.S. does not have an unlimited ability to absorb refugees and other immigrants, particularly those with little education, skills, or financial resources. Sooner or later, the demands placed on our economy, infrastructure, and available space will begin to degrade our quality of life. We owe it to our children, grandchildren, and future descendants to prevent that from happening.