Trump Dodges’s new ban faced with last attempt, experts say

US President Donald Trump has issued a new ban on travel for people from 12 countries, reviewing a policy of a distinctive feature of his first term.

However, there are some key differences.

The original travel ban has suffered a series of legal lesions. This time it seems that politics has been created to avoid the same pitfalls.

His predecessor, who turned to the seven mostly Muslim countries and was called the “Muslim Prohibition” by critics, was ordered only a week after Trump took office in 2017 during his first term in the White House.

The ban has been amended twice to overcome judicial challenges after opponents claim to be unconstitutional and illegal, as it discriminates passengers based on their religion.

In the end, the scale version was confirmed by the US Supreme Court in 2018, which this new ban is resembles.

Legal experts told the BBC that Trump seemed to have learned lessons from his first attempt.

Christie Jackson, an expert at US immigration legislation at London, Laura Devine Immigration, said the new ban was more stable as a result.

While the former lacked “clarity”, the new restrictions were “wider in scope” and “clearly defined” exceptions, she said.

Although there are some similarities in the nations selected by the 2017 ban and the prohibition of 2025, the Muslim majority countries are not the explicit goal of the last line.

Barbara McKuad, a professor of law at Michigan University and a former US lawyer for the Eastern Michigan district, told a Newshour program at the BBC World Service that it seems likely to win the Supreme Court’s approval if it was once aimed at that level.

The 12 countries subject to the most ranked restrictions of June 9 are mainly in the Middle East, Africa and the Caribbean, including Afghanistan, Iran and Somalia.

There will be partial restrictions on travelers from other seven countries, including Cuban and Venezuelan citizens.

Trump said the power of restrictions would be evaluated against the severity of the perceived threat, including terrorism.

But besides Iran, none of the 12 countries affected by the outspoken ban has been listed on the list of state sponsors of the US government terrorism.

Trump cites the incident on Sunday in Boulder, Colorado, in which a man was accused of throwing cocktails Molotov on demonstrators presenting on a host hosting, in a video announcing the ban on X.

The alleged striker was an Egyptian citizen. However, Egypt does not appear in any of the list.

Trump also specified high percentages of people who overcome their visas as a reason for listing certain countries.

However, Stephen D Heller, a US -based immigration lawyer, said there was a “lack of clarity” about what the threshold had to be met by an excessive state of a country so that this country could be placed on Trump’s ban. This can be the basis of a successful legal challenge, he suggested.

“If they rely on this concept of excessive stays of stay … They must determine what it really means,” he told the BBC.

But he noted that the existing US law gives President wide powers regarding immigration policy.

Unlike the first ban, which had to last from only 90 to 120 days, today’s order has no end date.

He is greeted with horror in the target countries.

Venezuela described the Trump administration as “supremes who believe they own the world”, although Somalia promised to “participate in a dialogue to cope with the raised concerns.”

The initial ban prompted the mass protests and sowed chaos at US airports.

He was canceled in 2021 by Trump’s heir, President Joe Biden, who called the “spot for our national conscience” policy.

Immigration lawyer, Shabbarm Lotphi, who challenged the previous travel ban, said it would be a “difficult battle” to cancel the new one.

“The president has the power to determine who is eligible for the United States,” she said, adding that because of the way the ban was written, it was “more difficult to find a huge group of people who could bring a class action case.”

“They have put more thought into this.”

D -Ja Lotfi noted that new restrictions may have consequences for students and other visa candidates abroad.

“Students who are stuck in the administrative processing are influenced. So are the winners of the Visa Visa lottery who have paid fees and went to interviews – they are unlikely to receive visas,” she said.

“Even the investors of the EB -5 – people who have invested over $ 1 million in the US economy – are affected. And visa owners for H -1b, stuck abroad, waiting to return to their US employers can also be blocked.”

Additional reporting from Leila Hotabahshi