Seanan McManusProfessor James BrentPolisci 15B11 December 2017 Trump’s Travel Ban On the January 27, Donald J. Trump signed Executive Order number 13769. This would soon be known from the media as the “Muslim ban”. The original travel ban that he signed suspended the U.S. Refugee Admissions program for 120 days, which prevented immigrants who were registered as refugees from third world countries from attempting to seek safety in America. He also restricted the admission of citizens from six countries: Yemen, Somalia, Sudan, Libya, Iran, and Syria. Trump also stated that refugee claims from minority religions would take priority over major religions that were considered to be persecuted in the United States (ex. Muslim based religions being targeted over Catholicism based religions). During the one day this executive order was in effect – before being blocked by the ninth circuit court – more than 700 travelers were detained and up to 60,000 visas were “provisionally revoked.” Trump’s executive order soon gained the name “Muslim ban” from many news stations such as CNN and other conglomerates. Donald Trump then reintroduced the travel ban two more times. The first time it was blocked once more by the Ninth Circuit Court but, the second time the Supreme Court allowed Trump’s travel ban to take place as it was more fine-tuned. Donald Trump’s travel ban has affected the diversity, morals and economic standings of American fundamentals and thus creating this executive order unconstitutional and inhumane. The first time Trump proposed his travel ban, the Ninth District court rejected Trump’s executive order to place the “Muslim Ban” into effect. This was challenged by many justice department lawyers saying that Trumps ability to block access from certain countries was considered constitutional. The Ninth District stated that “there is no precedent to support this claimed nonreviewability, which runs contrary to the fundamental structure of our constitutional democracy” (US appeals court upholds the suspension of Trump’s travel ban). The significance of the quote in relation to the original travel ban as showing no true evidence that these countries should be banned from entry or that refugees seeking safety from the wars and acts of terrorism occurring in the countries should be denied access just because their citizenship is associated with these countries. Surprisingly a spokesman for the Libyan government named Adb Elhadi Ma’Touk said: “It’s hard to demand that the USA or any other country not take precautionary measures” (Libyans understand Trump’s motive behind order for travel ban). The Libyan government official understood Trump’s travel ban, but Ma’touk also stated that “Especially with the current chaos and decision in Libya there is an argument to restrict entrance to certain people but allow entrance for those in dire need of safety from these civil wars” (Libyans understand Trump’s motive behind order for travel ban). During the first version of the ban, every Muslim country affected found it revolting but only one country understood the reasoning behind it. Yet, still pleaded for refugees who are innocent to be allowed to take refuge in the United States. However, this proved impossible because of the unconstitutional ban put forth by Donald Trump and his administration This Executive Order created a division between the Republican party who were in support of Donald Trump’s administration. Within hours of the first travel ban being introduced, approximately 20 Republican senators were opposed to it and voiced their arguments as to why it should not be allowed to go into effect. This is very significant as to now what senators of the Republican party think of the decisions made by Trump. John McCain started an argument against the executive order, was John McCain who released a joint statement with Senator Lindsey Graham. The statement sheds light that the Executive Order actually holds evidence that inhibits the United States ability to fight terrorism stating “this executive order bans Iraqi plots from entering our military bases in Arizona to fight our common enemies” (Here are the Republicans who have criticized president Trump’s travel ban). This quote states a fact that the travel ban hinders our ability to help countries with a lack of military experience as these Iraqi pilots cannot cross into our country and receive help to fight terrorism. This also puts our troops at risk because we have to keep them there since we cannot train these Iraqi soldiers on United States soil. Senator Dean Heller of Nevada also was against the travel ban as she said: “deeply troubled by the appearance of a religious ban” (Here are the Republicans who have criticized Trump’s travel ban). Senator Heller states this as there is an obvious appearance that this travel ban is strictly targeted at religions and completely violates the first clause of the constitution which states that the church and state should be separate and this executive order obviously uses government power to target the various variations of the Muslim religion. Donald Trump’s travel ban has a very interesting timeline as to how fast judges and courts responded to block this unconstitutional order. CNN has a full timeline of how judges and courts swiftly blocked his travel ban until the Ninth Circuit Court could fully put an end to the travel ban. On the 28th of January New York judge Derrick J. blocked part of the executive order stating that “violates their rights to due process and equal protection guaranteed by the united states constitution” (Judges temporarily block part of Trump’s immigration order WH stands by it). The judge that blocked part of this travel ban strictly stated that she was only blocking part of the “Muslim Ban” not the entirety of it. The part that was partially blocked was the area of the order that completely blocked entry from the seven Muslim majority countries, this ban was based on the fifth and fourteenth clause which lays the basic rules for every citizen’s right to due process and equal protection. The federal court then blocked part of Trump’s travel order was based in Massachusetts, the court ordered a temporary restraining order brought forward by two professors who are permanent residents who are college professors. The federal court blocked the executive order for seven days to a court date could be created. The judge who ordered the restraining order was named Allison D. Burroughs, an Obama appointee to the federal court of Massachusetts, said that the blocking of the executive order was logically supported because the government could not, “detain or remove individuals who arrived into the United States legally” (Judges temporarily block part of Trump’s immigration order, WH stands by it). The evidence behind blocking this part of the order was that it was against the constitution to remove already approved visas and block travel from refugees that were approved before arriving in the United States. Executive order #13679 is clearly unconstitutional. The first order that states this is section five clause C of the Executive order the clause states that ” Pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the entry of nationals of Syria as refugees is detrimental to the interests of the United States and thus suspend any such entry until such time as I have determined that sufficient changes have been made to the USRAP to ensure that admission of Syrian refugees is consistent with the national interest.” (Executive Order Protecting the Nation from foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States). The clause under section five of the Executive order is clearly unconstitutional as its targeting a Muslim based country and suspending the refugee program that allows them to come to the United States and take refuge from the civil wars. Trump’s travel ban was blocked over the reasoning of how it targeted religions which were mostly based in the middle east. In section five clause G of the order it is stipulated that “The Secretary of State shall submit to the President an initial report on the progress of the directive in subsection (b) of this section regarding prioritization of claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution within 100 days of the date of this order and shall submit a second report within 200 days of the date of this order” (Executive Order Protecting the Nation from foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States). Under this clause, it would allow immigration services to specifically target certain religious groups when it comes to moving to the United States. It is deemed unconstitutional because it violates the fourth, fifth and first amendments. The evidence in why it violates the fourth and fifth amendment is that the fourth and fifth amendment protects our rights to due process. The executive order allows the government to pick and choose what people they allow into the United States based on religious background, this violates these amendments because it states that you are not allowed to base accusations solely on religious grounds. The reason why Executive order #13679 violated the first amendment was that of separation of church and state. This means that laws may not target religious groups and persecute them. It is clearly stated in the Executive order, that it targets religions and violates many amendments. As Donald Trump’s more refined travel ban was passed on the fifth of December by the supreme court. Now that the Travel ban is in effect, it was more refined on what the restrictions were on for immigration. The ban targets Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen. In Chad, Libya, Syria, Yemen and North Korea it bans immigrant, business, and tourist visas. The ban this time around did not include 500,000 legal green card holders as they are able to keep their green cards for the future. The economic fallback of the Executive order would be around twenty to thirty billion dollars as immigrants bring in revenue and consumerism to the United States economy. These figures were found in the article Donald Trump on Immigration: How it Affects the Economy and You. Donald Trump’s travel ban has affected the diversity, morals and economic standings of American fundamentals and thus creating this executive order unconstitutional and inhumane. There are monumental amounts of evidence behind this that proves that his order has broken amendments made to our solemn Constitution and affects the economic integrity that our immigrants bring into the United States. Although some parts of the travel ban seem logical there are still many things that need to be fixed by introducing the original travel ban. The travel ban was continually blocked by federal judges until the supreme court allowed it to go through on the fifth of December. Works CitedShikha-dalmia. “Trump’s New Travel Ban: Mean and Senseless.” Reason.com, 29 Sept. 2017,reason.com/archives/2017/09/29/trumps-new-travel-ban-mean-and-senseless.Woodruff, Betsy. “Trump’s Travel Ban Is Back-and This Time It’s Forever.” The Daily Beast,The Daily Beast Company, 24 Sept. 2017, www.thedailybeast.com/trumps-travel-ban-is-backand-this-time-its-forever.Sherman, Mark. “US Supreme Court Allows Donald Trump to Uphold ‘Muslim Travel Ban’Restriction on Refugees.” The Independent, Independent Digital News and Media, 13Sept. 2017,www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-muslim-travel-ban-supreme-court-overrules-refugee-ruling-asylum-seekers-immigration-a7944021.html.Sherman, Mark. “US Supreme Court Allows Donald Trump to Uphold ‘Muslim Travel Ban’Restriction on Refugees.” The Independent, Independent Digital News and Media, 13Sept. 2017, www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-muslim-travel-ban-supreme-court-overrules-refugee-ruling-asylum-seekers-immigration-a7944021.htmlWirtschaft, Jacob. “Libyans Understand Trump’s Motive behind Order for Travel Ban.” The Washington Times, The Washington Times, 1 Feb. 2017,www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/1/libyans-understand-trumps-reason-behind-o rder-for-/.Heeres, Cees. Japanese Immigration and the Dark Prehistory of Donald Trump’s Muslim Ban. 2017, Japanese Immigration and the Dark Prehistory of Donald Trump’s Muslim Ban.Cnbc. “US Appeals Court Upholds Suspension of Trump Travel Ban.” CNBC, CNBC, 9 Feb. 2017, www.cnbc.com/2017/02/09/appeals-court-to-issue-decision-on-trump-travel-ban-later-today.htmAmadeo, Kimberly. “How Do Trump’s Immigration Plans Affect You?” The Balance, 5 Dec. 2017, www.thebalance.com/donald-trump-immigration-impact-on-economy-4151107.Blitzer, Jonathan. “What the Supreme Court’s Travel-Ban Ruling Means in Practice.” The New Yorker, The New Yorker, 1 Aug. 2017, www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/what-the-supreme-courts-travel-ban-ruling-means-in-practice.Trump, Donald. “Executive Order Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States. The White House, The United States Government, 27 Jan. 2017, www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-protecting-nation-foreign-terrorist-entry-united-states/.Vogue, Ariane de, and Eli Watkins. “Judges Temporarily Block Part of Trump’s Immigration Order, WH Stands by It.” CNN, Cable News Network, 29 Jan. 2017, www.cnn.com/2017/01/28/politics/2-iraqis-file-lawsuit-after-being-detained-in-ny-due-to-travel-ban/.