Trump Administration Considers Expanded Travel Ban Targeting 43 Countries
The Trump administration is considering a new travel ban targeting citizens from 43 countries. The draft includes a “red” list barring entry for 11 countries and an “orange” list imposing restrictions on 10 others. Feedback from various officials is ongoing as the proposal develops.
The Trump administration is currently contemplating a new travel ban that may affect the citizens of up to 43 countries. This proposed ban, which surpasses the travel restrictions imposed during President Trump’s first term, has generated discussions among officials familiar with its content. A draft list is circulating that outlines a tiered approach to these travel restrictions based on the countries’ security and diplomatic relations with the United States.
The draft includes a comprehensive “red” list of 11 countries from which citizens would be completely barred from entering the United States. This list comprises Afghanistan, Bhutan, Cuba, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen. Officials noted that this list was created by the State Department weeks ago, and changes are anticipated before it reaches the White House.
Additionally, the proposal encompasses an “orange” list comprising 10 countries where travel restrictions would be implemented, yet citizens would not face a total entry ban. Affluent business travelers might gain entry, but those seeking entry via immigrant or tourist visas would be denied. Security and diplomatic officials are currently providing feedback regarding the accuracy and implications of including specific countries on these lists, considering policy impacts.
In summary, the Trump administration is exploring an extensive travel ban that could target 43 countries, including a complete entry prohibition for citizens from 11 nations, while imposing restricted access for 10 others. The evolving draft highlights the administration’s ongoing efforts to manage national security and immigration policies amidst evolving international relations.
Original Source: www.nytimes.com
Post Comment