Travel Ban-Take 3-The Supreme Court Episode

Suppose you have a petulant child who hates your brother Jim and does not want him to visit your home. You have shut the child down, but the child just whines and screams. You know reasoning does not work. So you just say, OK, Jim cannot come for no reason. But if Jim has a reason, he can come. You are giving your child a lollipop. The child shows off his lollipop. The next time, Jim comes, you tell the child, but Jim wants to visit family. That’s a reason. And he will not come for no reason. I promise. Give the child another lollipop and hope the child forgets about this in 120 days.
That sums up the Supreme Court’s decision to lift the temporary restraining order against Trump’s travel ban. It has no substance, does not really impact anyone, and gives Trump his lollipop.

As I have said in my blog before, there is no justification for the travel ban on 6 countries: Syria, Iran, Yemen, Somalia, Sudan and Libya. Are there terrorist cells in these countries? Yes, of course. But the procedures in place already have the US Consulate performing extreme security checks before an individual is granted visa to enter the US. At one point in time, during the Obama administration, some suspected terrorists entered the US. They were deported and Obama suspended travel for these countries until a more thorough vetting procedure was implemented. But that was done, and no suspected terrorists have entered since. So clearly Trump just want to appease his intolerant base with the travel ban

The Supreme Court removed the temporary restraining order with a lesser temporary restraining order. The people not impacted are:

1. Anyone with a current visa—even a visitor’s visa issued before June 14, 2017
2. Anyone with a work visa-H, J, L, O,P, R I, F
3. Anyone with an immigrant or non Immigrant (K) family based visa
4. Diplomats

The Only group that is NOT covered are foreign tourists who are coming to USA for visiting sites in the United States. But seriously, how many tourists from these 6 countries do we find, just visiting the Grand Canyon or Disney Land? They have enough problems on their hand to think about expensive vacations. And the super-rich, who can afford to, does have either business or family connections.

B visa holders should bring with them documents showing family ties or business ties. Attending a conference, or lecturing is a valid business tie, and “mother in laws” are valid family relation. (Supreme Court said this, not me). Other visa holders should bring their visa related documents just to be sure.

So in effect, it’s a useless ban. It does affect Muslims, because Muslims are a majority in these countries. Trump said he had “clear victory”,  and the ACLU vowed to fight it.
This ban creates fear among many Muslim legal travelers. Attorney’s make money playing into that fear.

Other than that, it’s just sound and fury, signifying nothing

 

For more information call Banerjee & Associates