President Donald Trump has signed a sweeping new travel ban targeting citizens from 12 countries, citing national security concerns. The proclamation, which echoes the controversial policy from his first term, is set to take effect on June 9, 2025.
The newly announced executive order bars entry into the United States for nationals from Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, Congo (Brazzaville), Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen. In addition to these full bans, partial travel restrictions will be imposed on citizens from Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela. These restrictions limit access to certain visa categories.
The White House has stated that this measure is a response to ongoing threats posed by individuals from these nations and the inability of the listed countries to effectively cooperate on security vetting procedures. According to the administration, the countries under full restriction exhibit a “large-scale presence of terrorists,” poor record-keeping of criminal backgrounds, and weak systems for verifying traveler identities.
“We Cannot Have Open Migration”
In a video message posted on X (formerly Twitter), Trump defended the policy, stating:
“We cannot have open migration from any country where we cannot safely and reliably vet and screen. We will not allow people to enter our country who wish to do us harm.”
This move marks a significant step in Trump’s broader immigration crackdown during his second term, following a January executive order that mandated stricter visa screening procedures and a review of foreign nations’ compliance with U.S. vetting standards.
The new directive is structured to avoid the chaos that ensued during the implementation of the 2017 travel ban. Back then, travelers were caught in limbo at airports with little warning. This time, visas already issued will remain valid, and the directive includes a set of well-defined exemptions.
Exemptions to the Travel Ban
While the ban is wide-reaching, it includes exemptions for certain groups:
-
Lawful U.S. permanent residents (green card holders)
-
Immediate relatives of U.S. citizens and residents
-
U.S. government employees with Special Immigrant Visas
-
Dual nationals traveling with a passport from an unaffected country
-
Afghan nationals holding Special Immigrant Visas
-
Athletes, coaches, and staff traveling for major international sporting events like the 2026 FIFA World Cup and the 2028 Summer Olympics in Los Angeles
The Secretary of State also has the authority to approve entry on a case-by-case basis if the individual serves a U.S. national interest.
Mixed Reactions at Home and Abroad
The travel ban has drawn strong criticism from global and domestic leaders, civil society groups, and human rights organizations.
The African Union Commission voiced concern over the potential negative impacts of the directive, particularly on educational exchanges, diplomatic cooperation, and commercial partnerships. In a statement, the AU urged the U.S. administration to pursue a “more consultative approach” and engage in constructive dialogue with affected nations.
Chad responded by suspending visa issuance to U.S. citizens, while Somalia’s ambassador to Washington reaffirmed his country’s willingness to work with the U.S. to resolve security concerns.
On the domestic front, critics labeled the move discriminatory and politically motivated. Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal called it a continuation of Trump’s infamous “Muslim Ban” and warned it would further isolate the U.S. from global allies. Human rights watchdog Amnesty International USA described the policy as “discriminatory, racist, and downright cruel.”
Conversely, Trump allies have rallied around the measure. Congressman Clay Higgins emphasized that entry into the U.S. is a “privilege, not a right,” while Republicans Overseas UK chairman Greg Swenson called the list “a common-sense policy.”
Lessons from 2017?
Legal experts have noted that the 2025 version of the travel ban appears more structured and measured compared to its 2017 predecessor. Immigration law professor Christi Jackson pointed out that the rollout was more deliberate, with clearer exemptions and notice given to travelers.
“This time I think there has been more thought given to this,” said Barbara McQuade, a law professor and former U.S. attorney. “It is very likely to be upheld by the Supreme Court.”
The original travel ban was heavily criticized for targeting predominantly Muslim-majority countries and was eventually challenged in court. It was later revised and upheld by the Supreme Court in 2018 before being repealed by President Joe Biden in 2021.
What’s Next?
As the June 9 enforcement date approaches, legal challenges are expected. Civil rights organizations are preparing lawsuits, arguing that the policy is discriminatory and violates international law.
Meanwhile, the Trump administration has not ruled out expanding the list of affected countries in the future, based on periodic reviews. This suggests that immigration and border security will remain at the center of Trump’s second-term agenda.
Ireland Deportation to Nigeria Marks Third Charter Flight in 2025
