Why Pres­i­dent Trump’s Con­tro­ver­sial Travel Ban Is Un­jus­ti­fied

ForbesWeekly - - NEWS - FOL­LOW NIALL MCCARTHY, FORBES CON­TRIB­U­TOR, AT www.forbes.com/sites/niallm­c­carthy

A mod­i­fied ver­sion of Pres­i­dent Trump’s con­tro­ver­sial travel ban re­cently went into ef­fect, mean­ing peo­ple from six mainly Mus­lim coun­tries and all refugees face tougher en­try to the United States. Trav­el­ers with­out “close” fam­ily or busi­ness re­la­tion­ships in the U.S. could be de­nied visas and en­try while ex­cep­tions could be made for peo­ple with “a cred­i­ble claim of a bona fide re­la­tion­ship” with some­one in the U.S. The coun­tries af­fected by the rule are Iran, Libya, So­ma­lia, Su­dan, Syria and Ye­men.

Pres­i­dent Trump has in­sisted the travel ban is vi­tal for U.S. na­tional se­cu­rity, cit­ing ter­ror­ist at­tacks in Paris, Lon­don, Brus­sels and Ber­lin as jus­ti­fi­ca­tion for its im­ple­men­ta­tion. How­ever, crit­ics have called it Is­lam­o­pho­bic, and the orig­i­nal ver­sion of the ban led to mass protests and le­gal chal­lenges be­fore a na­tion­wide tem­po­rary restraining or­der was is­sued, pre­vent­ing its en­force­ment.

In its cur­rent form, the travel ban is still un­jus­ti­fied, as a study from the Cato In­sti­tute clearly shows. Their re­search found that be­tween 1975 and 2015, zero na­tion­als from Iran, Libya, So­ma­lia, Su­dan and Ye­men were re­spon­si­ble for a fa­tal ter­ror­ist at­tack on U.S. soil. This is backed up by data from the New Amer­ica Foun­da­tion which shows that since 9/11, no fa­tal at­tacks in the U.S. can be at­tributed to ji­hadist ter­ror­ists from the re­stricted na­tions while 13 Amer­i­can cit­i­zens and le­gal per­ma­nent res­i­dents were re­spon­si­ble for fa­tal ji­hadist at­tacks. The Cato in­sti­tute also found that the chance of an Amer­i­can be­ing killed by a refugee ter­ror­ist is one in 3.6 bil­lion a year.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.