» Travel ban:
After months of wrangling, tighter restrictions on travel to the U.S. from six mostly Muslim nations take effect.
WASHINGTON - After months of wrangling, tighter restrictions on travel to the U.S. from six mostly Muslim nations took effect Thursday evening after the Supreme Court gave its go-ahead for a limited version of President Donald Trump’s plans for a ban.
Visa applicants from the six countries — and all refugees — will need to show close family or business ties to the United States.
Visas that have already been approved will not be revoked, and that should help avert the kind of chaos at airports around the world that surrounded an initial travel ban ordered shortly after Trump took office.
In that case, some travelers with previously approved visas were kept off flights or barred entry on arrival in the U.S.
There were no major problems reported in the first hours after the new guidelines were issued. The Middle East’s biggest airline said its flights to the United States were operating normally.
However, Dubai-based Emirates reminded passengers that they “must possess the appropriate travel documents, including a valid U.S. entry visa, in order to travel.”
The new instructions issued by the State Department will affect visa applicants from Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Libya, Iran and Yemen.
An applicant must prove a relationship with a parent, spouse, child, adult son or daughter, sonin-law, daughter-in-law or sibling already in the United States to be eligible.
The same requirement, with some exceptions, holds for would-be refugees from all nations who are still awaiting approval.
Grandparents, grandchildren, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, cousins, brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law, fiancées or other extended family members are not considered to be close relations, according to the guidelines that were issued in a cable sent to all U.S. embassies and consulates late on Wednesday.
As far as business or professional links are concerned, the State Department said, a legitimate relationship must be “formal, documented and formed in the ordinary course rather than for the purpose of evading” the ban.
Journalists, students, workers or lecturers who have valid invitations or employment contracts in the U.S. would be exempt from the ban.
The exemption does not apply to those who seek a relationship with an American business or educational institution purely for the purpose of avoiding the rules.
A hotel reservation or car rental contract, even if prepaid, would also not count.
Consular officers may grant other exemptions to applicants from the six nations if they have “previously established significant contacts with the United States;” “significant business or professional obligations” in the U.S.; if they are infants, adopted children or in need of urgent medical care; if they are traveling for business with a recognized international organization or the U.S. government or if they are legal residents of Canada who apply for visas in Canada, according to the cable.
On Monday, the Supreme Court partially lifted lower court injunctions against Trump’s executive order that had temporarily banned visas for citizens of the six countries.
The justices’ ruling exempted applicants from the ban if they could prove a “bona fide relationship” with a U.S. person or entity, but the court offered only broad guidelines — suggesting they would include a relative, job offer or invitation to lecture in the U.S. — as to how that should be defined. The new guidance rules remain in place at least until the Supreme Court hears arguments on the case in the fall and then issues a final ruling.
Shortly after taking office, Trump ordered the refugee ban and a travel ban affecting the six countries, plus Iraq.
He said it was needed to protect the U.S. from terrorists, but opponents said it was unfairly harsh and was intended to meet his campaign promise to keep Muslims out of the United States.
After a federal judge struck down the bans, Trump signed a revised order intended to overcome legal hurdles.
That was also struck down by lower courts, but the Supreme Court’s action partially reinstated it.