Opinion I Of The Trump's Immigration Order and Its Intrigues

UNDERSTANDING THE TRUMP’S IMMIGRATION ORDER, AND ITS INTRIGUES

       

On Friday 27^th January 2017 – barely a week after assumption to duty – the current President of the United States (U.S) in the person of Mr. Donald Trump abruptly signed an Executive Order that severely restricts immigration from seven Muslim countries on any visa category including Iraq, Iran, Syria, Somalia, Sudan, Libya and Yemen as well as suspends refugee admission into the country, for 120 days. The order equally bars all Syrian refugees indefinitely.

        

According to the said leader, the ban which applies only to non-U.S citizens was not targeted at a certain religion as being presumed in most quarters; rather, it was meant to affect nations that had been potentially of great security threat to the U.S. In his words, some nations – particularly Arab – had been noted to constitute security nuisance to the U.S, thus it was high time such lingered anomaly is aptly addressed.

        

The ban implies that anyone with the U.S citizenship – whether via natural-born or naturalization – is not affected, though on Sunday January 29 the White House’s Chief of Staff Mr. Reince Preibus disclosed on NBC’s programme titled ‘Meet the Press’ that Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) agents would have ‘discretionary authority’ to question U.S citizens coming from the seven countries.

         

The order included individuals who are permanent residents of the U.S otherwise known as the ‘Green-Card holders’, who are travelling overseas to visit their respective families or for work-related matters, although a senior administration official while drawing clarity to the order the following day informed that their applications would be considered on a case-by-case basis. He further stressed that permanent residents from the affected countries who are in the U.S would have to meet with a Consular officer before leaving the country (U.S).

        

It’s noteworthy that the order in question also targets individuals of the affected countries who hold dual citizenship with another country. For instance, a person who holds both Iranian and German citizenships, or an individual who hails from Libya and also holds Nigerian citizenship or vice-versa. But it doesn’t apply to people who hold the U.S citizenship alongside citizenship of any of the affected countries, although based on reliable reports a CBP agent can presumably interrogate such a person in regard to his/her discretion.

        

The order has been widely criticized by various legal personnel as it is being argued by several analysts that it would negatively affect the U.S trade relation with the listed countries, whilst on the contrary in some quarters, it has gained countless accolades and what have you. It has led to massive protests at several airports across the U.S where people with valid documentation were detained.

         

However, legal challenges against those detentions recorded tremendous success. Judges in four cities of the U.S to include Boston, New York, Virginia and Seattle ruled against the detention. The rulings seemed to be limited to those people already at the U.S airports or in transit as at the time the order was pronounced, thus they didn’t ostensibly say anything about the legality of the president’s action.

        

Though any president of the U.S has broad discretion under the extant law to bar a class of persons deemed detrimental to the country’s security from entering into the country within any stipulated period and Mr. Trump isn’t exempted from such immunity, it’s pertinent to acknowledge that there are a few intriguing aspects of the abrupt executive order which perhaps isn’t peculiar to the U.S.

        

Regarding the dual citizenship part of the said ban, it has been reliably gathered that the United Kingdom (U.K) is not affected. The U.K Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Mr. Boris Johnson revealed penultimate week that the U.S had assured him it didn’t apply to the U.K nationals. This significantly and amazingly implies that anyone who hails from the U.K and equally holds citizenship from any of the affected seven countries, or vice-versa, is automatically exempted from the order. One may begin to wonder why only the U.K, or probably among its likes, would enjoy such preference.

        

Similarly, it would be recalled that Saudi Arabia was the major suspect in the 9/11 terror incident that brought down the World Trade Centre situated in New York, U.S.A, which was apparently masterminded by the Late Osama bin Laden. Yet the said country was exonerated from the listed countries that pose threat to the United States’ security. How do you reconcile this? Even such countries as Pakistan and Egypt that are globally reckoned to be affiliate of some widely recognized vices were also exempted from the list.

        

While pondering over the observation, you may be of the notion that President Trump’s action was informed by mere personal interest rather than America’s. As much as I appreciate his boldness toward putting up such courageous policy – though temporarily – he must as well comprehend that an action targeted towards addressing a country’s security issues isn’t supposed to be one-sided or carried out owing to individual aim.

         

He had already stated prior to his inauguration on January 20, 2017 that him alongside his team would make America strong, proud, safe, and great again. Hence, the best we could do at the moment is to hope his reign truly means well for the highly revered U.S. Think about it!

Follow me: @mediambassador              

http://facebook.com/fred4nwaozor