Trump’s new order revives ‘Muslim ban’, takes aim at pro-Palestine voices
text_fieldsCivil rights advocates in the United States have raised concerns over a new executive order signed by former President Donald Trump, fearing it could revive and expand his earlier travel bans that disproportionately targeted Muslim-majority countries.
The directive, which was released on Monday, has drawn criticism for its potential to affect foreign nationals within the United States as well as those seeking entry, with experts warning of its broader implications for immigrant rights and advocacy efforts, Al Jazeera reported.
The new order calls for federal agencies to compile a list of nations with inadequate vetting and screening systems, suggesting that nationals from these countries could face partial or complete suspension of their admission to the US. It further mandates an investigation into the actions and activities of individuals who entered the country from these nations since 2021, potentially laying the groundwork for deportations.
Critics argue that this approach targets immigrants unfairly and could be used to suppress political activism, particularly among international students advocating for Palestinian rights.
While similar in scope to Trump’s 2017 travel ban, which blocked entry for individuals from several Muslim-majority nations, the new directive extends its reach by including provisions to remove foreign nationals already residing in the US.
Advocates warn that the vague language of the order grants broad authority to federal agencies, allowing them to pursue actions against individuals deemed undesirable by the administration. This has raised fears of immigrant families being separated, individuals being targeted based on their political views, and the amplification of anti-immigrant sentiments.
Legal experts have noted that the order’s framework aligns with existing immigration laws that allow the president to restrict entry for certain groups, but it does not explicitly provide the authority to deport individuals already within the country.
Nevertheless, the directive instructs officials to utilise legal frameworks and loopholes to facilitate removals, which has been criticised as a method to advance a divisive agenda. The order also emphasises the need to ensure that foreign nationals in the US do not display hostile attitudes toward American citizens or institutions, a requirement that critics argue could be used to suppress dissent and curtail freedom of expression.
The order has drawn specific condemnation for its potential impact on international students and activists supporting Palestinian rights, with provisions appearing to target individuals who advocate for causes that the administration opposes.
Advocacy groups have pointed to the directive’s alignment with past rhetoric from pro-Israel politicians, who have called for the deportation of international students participating in Palestinian solidarity protests. These groups argue that the order creates a chilling effect on political expression and serves to marginalise communities critical of US foreign policy.
The directive also underscores broader cultural objectives, such as promoting the “proper assimilation” of immigrants and fostering a unified American identity, which critics see as an attempt to enforce an exclusionary vision of patriotism.
Observers have linked this narrative to Trump’s previous comments disparaging immigrants from non-European countries, as well as to the broader “culture war” strategies employed by right-wing politicians. The order’s implications for the perception of what it means to be American have prompted concerns that it fosters division rather than inclusivity.
While some legal experts have highlighted the limits of the order in enabling mass deportations, they caution that its implementation could still result in heightened scrutiny for immigrant communities and a more aggressive stance on deportation proceedings. The directive’s potential use as a tool for ideological exclusion has also been criticised as undermining the principles of free speech and diversity, which are foundational to the United States.
Civil rights organisations have warned that the executive order, despite its legal ambiguities, reflects a broader effort to stigmatise immigrant communities and silence dissent. They argue that the directive perpetuates a narrative of fear and exclusion, targeting individuals based on their national origin, political beliefs, and cultural identity.
The expanded scope of the order, compared to previous iterations, signals a concerning shift in immigration policy that could have lasting consequences for immigrant rights and advocacy in the US.