Are Non-Muslims from the banned countries allowed into the US?

  • I keep seeing Trump's latest bit of executive action regarded as a 'Muslim Ban'.

    It doesn't make sense to me, since all of the information I can find shows that he is imposing a 90-day ban on travel for all citizens of those countries, not just the Muslim ones.

    If non-Muslims are also banned, why is this being called a Muslim ban?

    I want to clarify (because in today's hyper-aggressive political environment we need to anymore), I am not looking to argue, I am looking for information. I feel like either I am missing something or the facts of the matter have been spun.

    Ugh.......this fixation on religion thing is so annoying. 100% of XYZ population (regardless of religion) are not allowed to travel here due to .006%(random handwavium number) of them (regardless of religion) clinging to ideas of grandeur and hatred of those who think differently than they do (wait....I think the hatred of people who think differently is on both sides..........hmmm......maybe this should change)

    Is there a generic non-flamy name for this ban? I think that name should go in the title, but can't think of what to call it.

  • Panda

    Panda Correct answer

    5 years ago

    No, all non-citizens and non-green card holders from these countries will not be allowed into the US.

    The text of the Executive Action:

    I hereby proclaim that the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12), would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants and nonimmigrants, of such persons for 90 days from the date of this order (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas).

    (emphasis mine)

    It's not accurate to describe it as a Muslim ban. The story was inspired by Trump's statements during his campaign.

    This article published by The Hill states:

    They point to Trump’s Dec. 2015 call for a “total and complete shutdown” of Muslim immigration to the U.S. He later softened his stance, saying he wanted to target individuals from terror-prone nations.

    (emphasis mine)

    "The story was inspired by Trump's statements during his campaign": And, perhaps, by the actual motivation behind the order, in which context non-Muslims affected by the ban may be seen as collateral damage.

    Comments suggesting that non-Muslims would receive preferential treatment in receiving waivers from the ban or expedited processing after the ban also go a long way to justifying the characterization of the ban as being a “Muslim ban.”

    I don't understand your middle paragraph. The point is that this executive order is a "softened" version of the same thing, right? Or are you saying his earlier statements are completely unrelated?

    There's also the fact that the nations banned are *primarily* Muslim, as far as I can tell.

    You may also add the results of this question re: whether it's accurate to describe it as "Muslim" ban: http://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/14997/what-percentage-of-the-worlds-muslim-population-is-affected-by-trumps-so-calle

    @QPaysTaxes - that's not valid either. If you sort by %, four top majority Muslim countries are NOT part of the ban. Only one of top 8 is.

    @user4012 Reread what I said -- I didn't say the banned countries were the most Muslim, I said they were primarily Muslim. In other words, each of the countries has more followers of Islam than other religions.

    @QPaysTaxes - that is irrelevant. You're implying they were picked *because* they are majority Muslim. The facts indicate that they weren't, because "more" majority Muslim countries weren't included.

    @user4012 Oh, I see what you mean. However, that reasoning *is* being used, relevant or not, by the media, to justify calling it a "Muslim ban" -- which is why I mentioned it. I should have elaborated in my first comment.

    @phoog if the "actual motivation" was to ban muslims, why weren't the _other_ 43 primarily muslim nations included?

    Your answer is correct, but it's worth noting that Trump has made statements indicating he would like to give Christians priority, even if he is not doing so currently: http://www.npr.org/2017/01/29/512305163/fact-check-trump-tweets-on-christians-isis-and-vetting-miss-the-bigger-picture

    @MichaelJ. perhaps because they thought they'd start small and work their way up. There have certainly been many suggestions that they are preparing to expand the list.

    @jmite That's a different part of the executive order. Section 3(c) bans all people (refugee or otherwise) from the countries on the affected list of countries from entering the U.S. for 90 days. Section 5(a) suspends the refugee admission program entirely for 120 days and Section 5(b) says that once it's resumed, priority should be given to refugees citing religious persecution, provided that the religion of the individual is not the majority religion in the individual's country of nationality.

    @reirab which means that (for example) Chinese and Indian Muslims fleeing religious persecution would be granted priority, doesn't it?

    @phoog Yes, it does.

    When 99.4% of the population is Muslim (Iran, for instance), then "all citizens, not just Muslims" is a distinction without a difference.

License under CC-BY-SA with attribution


Content dated before 7/24/2021 11:53 AM