Trump Signs Sweeping Travel Ban Targeting 12 Countries to ‘Protect U.S. from Foreign Terrorists’

In a move already provoking political and legal controversy, former President Donald Trump signed a new executive order reinstating and broadening his administration’s highly controversial travel ban, which restricts citizens of 12 nations and imposes partial bans on another 7 countries. The move, justified by Trump as an anti-terrorism measure “to protect the United States from foreign terrorists,” is being attacked by civil rights organizations as discriminatory and maybe even unconstitutional.

The executive order, which Trump signed in front of a Florida campaign rally, is a copy of Trump’s tough-on-immigration agenda. It’s a copy of the original 2017 travel ban, which was universally condemned and stuck in judicial purgatory, but this one supposedly includes new security measures and intelligence reports.

What is the New Travel Ban All About?

The 12 nations have a general travel ban by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) because they are considered to present high security risks in the sense that they have terrorist links, inadequate identity verification infrastructure, or unreliable governments. The administration has not released the entire list, but sources indicate it includes:

• Iran
• Syria
• Yemen
• Libya
• Iraq
• Somalia
• Sudan
• North Korea
• Afghanistan
• Venezuela
• Pakistan
• Eritrea

Seven other nations — according to reports, Nigeria, Lebanon, Algeria, and Egypt — will be subject to partial restrictions, which are non-immigrant visas, such as work and study permits.

We’re not closing the door to the world. We’re closing the door to those who are hostile to our country,” Trump said in the announcement of the decision. “We’ve learned from past experiences. National security first.“

Is It National Security or Political Strategy?

The Trump campaign presented the travel ban as a “proactive security plan” to avoid terror attacks on U.S. soil. It referred to a precedent in the past when citizens of the banned countries tried or succeeded in carrying out such attacks, such as in the San Bernardino attack of 2015 or the Ohio State attack of 2016.

But the decree is said to be based on lies by the critics. The likelihood of an American being killed in a terror attack carried out by a foreign-born perpetrator is 1 in 3.8 million in a year, and much lower than by guns or natural disasters, a Cato Institute report released in 2023 asserts.

This travel ban is all about optics vs. actual security,” Brookings Institution security policy specialist Dr. Sarah Karim asserted. “There is no high correlation between these bans and terrorism.”

Legal and Human Rights Reactions

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) also quickly denounced the new ban and planned to sue it in federal court. They assert that the order crosses the bounds of the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution and discriminatorily singles out Muslim-majority countries, the same they contended when Trump was initially elected.

This is a travel ban 2.0 — broader net, same xenophobic purpose,” said Omar Jadwat, Director of the Immigrants’ Rights Project of the ACLU.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) called it “an extension of the Muslim Ban” and requested that Congress pass legislation that would prohibit such executive overreach.

Effect on Immigrants and Visa Holders

The cap will hit thousands of foreign visitors and immigrant families, most notably middle-class Americans looking for a visa or asylum. Visa processing would be suspended or put on hold, various U.S. embassies in the target nations report.

No less than 120,000 visa recipients from banned nations were granted visas during 2023 alone, based on the Migration Policy Institute — figures that now stand to collapse unless exemptions are put into place.

Human rights organizations worry the policy will tear families apart and decelerate U.S. resettlements of vulnerable refugees, including from war zones like Syria and Afghanistan.

Political Repercussions

The action is being seen as Trump’s action to energize his base again in the broader 2025 electoral cycle by going back to the issues of pillars such as immigration, border security, and sovereignty. Democrats and even some moderate Republicans are, however, viewing it as political drama at the expense of human lives.

“This is a poor, failing, discriminatory policy,” Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) stated. “It doesn’t make us safer — it just makes us appear to be afraid and inhuman.”

Others – at least a few right-wing politicians – were thankful for what was being done, Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) stating, “Trump is putting American lives first and ahead of global chaos. This is leadership.”

International Reaction

It has been generally silent on the matter from global leaders, although Iranian, Libyan, and Pakistani authorities asked for emergency meetings with American embassy envoys, sources added. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) official termed the order “deeply concerning,” saying it may be violating international humanitarian norms.

What Happens Next?

Legal professionals foresee a speedy court response. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which had already put on hold some of Trump’s 2017 ban, could once again take center stage. The conservative-leaning Supreme Court had in 2018 upheld a comparable ban, so this one might also survive — unless Congress intervenes.

In the meantime, travelers from banned countries are being encouraged to obtain legal counsel before traveling.

Follow us for more news at Valleynewz.com