UNDERSTANDING THE TRUMP’S IMMIGRATION ORDER, AND ITS INTRIGUES
On Friday 27th 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
