On January 28 thousands of demonstrators stood in defiance of the Travel Ban to protest the origanal ban which has been revised since then. Author of the article, Harrison Jacobs, writes how Hillary Clinton is opposed to the Travel ban and stands with the protesters against it. Clinton says the ban is unconsitutional and criticizes Trump's methods of implementing the ban.
The American Civil Liberties Union and other groups are ready to go to court against Trump's unfair travel ban. The ACLU's Executive Director Anthony D Romero says it is “still a Muslim ban at it's core" even though the ban has been revised to include other less Muslim countries. ACLU argues that the ban "violates federal law" and they are going to court against it again.
This article by The Guardian describes how after the travel ban was put into effect there was chaos around the country as around 100 people were held at airports. The Guardian also tells of multiple US residents held at airports including Iman Alknfushe, an Iranian US permanent legal resident. Some of them were held for more than 30 hours. There were many protests across the US on Sunday in response to the new immigration policies. The Guardian quotes many protesters who are immigrants or decended from immigrants and refugees who say things like "I’m appalled and scared and angry and I’m sad about what’s happening" and carry signs that read “child of refugees” and “nation of immigrants”
The Editorial Board of USA Today writes that "Adding the two non-Muslim nations was likely a cosmetic change" referencing the third version of Trump's travel ban in which it now includes Venezuela and North Korea. They make the argument that the terror attacks carried out by non-americans were by people who came from countries not on the travel ban list. The board says that "If Travel Ban 3 were a movie, critics would call it an improvement over the previous two releases but still not very good."
Even though there is much support and arguments against the travel ban some people think that the ban is nessasary to ensure safety of the US. One of these people, Danny Eapen thinks the ban is not unfair because he is used to being screened and it happens all over the world. Susan Richardson says that "any country has the absolute right to protect it's borders." Read this article to see the rest of the arguments and opinions of a diverse group of people in support of the ban.
The New York Times Editorial Board tells how President Trump's first travel ban was quickly shut down by the courts and the revised version was struck down by two federal appeals courts quickly also. The Times Board calls the ban foolish and groundless and writes that "No one from the affected countries has been responsible for a fatal terror attack in the United States in the past two decades." But still the ban is in affect, although the board thinks that by October it will have "triggered a whole new round of litigation" because of the clear anti-muslim policy.
"The Trump administration is taking a much samrter, tougher approach to terrorism." writes David French. The new revised travel ban beefs up security which will prevent more terrorism. French writes that although there are a few terrorists who work alone, most of them have contacts and get inspiration from other terrorists. Pausing the refugee entry for a few months to review our vetting process will go a long way toward preventing terrorism. He also states that it is the opposite of Obama's strategy of opening up our borders to refugees and immigrants which had the result of "more terror, and more terror plots." To sum up this article, French gives arguments that support the travel ban and President Trump and why the ban is beneficial to America.
The Editorial Board of The Wasington Post wries that the second version of Trump's travel ban is barely better than the first. It now includes the country of Chad, a US ally against certain terrorism. They also state that research even shows that the majority of recent terrorism was carried out by Americans. The Board decribes how the ban has barely changed and the addition of North Korea and Venezuela is a "fig leaf to disguise a would-be “Muslim ban.” This article shows how there is no evidence that this travel ban wil have a significant amount of difference on Americans safety.