President Donald Trump’s new travel ban went into effect shortly after midnight on Monday, restricting entry into the United States for nationals from 12 countries and imposing partial restrictions on citizens from seven additional nations.
The policy announcement followed a firebombing incident in Colorado, which President Trump cited as a critical reason for the ban, emphasizing the need for enhanced national security measures. This decision marks a revival of a controversial travel ban that Trump implemented during his first term and pledged to reinstate on the campaign trail.
In a video released on Wednesday, Trump stated, “The recent terror attack in Boulder, Colorado has underscored the extreme dangers posed to our country by the entry of foreign nationals who are not properly vetted, as well as those who come here as temporary visitors and overstay their visas. We don’t want them.”
The travel ban predominantly affects nations in Africa and the Middle East. Interestingly, the suspect charged in the Colorado attack is from Egypt, which is notably not included on the restricted list. Trump indicated that the list could be revised over time.
“The list is subject to revision based on whether material improvements are made, and likewise, new countries can be added as threats emerge around the world,” he said, reiterating the administration’s commitment to preventing harmful individuals from entering the U.S. Trump emphasized, “But we will not allow people to enter our country who wish to do us harm, and nothing will stop us from keeping America safe.”
Legal challenges to the ban are anticipated; however, experts believe this latest version has significant differences that may make it less susceptible to legal obstacles than the previous ban from 2017.
The initial ban, primarily targeting predominantly Muslim countries, incited immediate backlash and was met with legal hurdles that forced the Trump administration to make several modifications. The Supreme Court ultimately upheld a revised form of the ban in 2018. When Joe Biden assumed the presidency in January 2021, he repealed the ban, denouncing it as a “stain on our national conscience.”
According to Georgetown University law professor Stephen Vladeck, Trump has seemingly learned from prior experiences with travel bans. He remarked, “I think what’s really striking about the latest iteration of this kind of travel ban is really how radically different it looks from the clumsier, I think, less careful attempts we saw during the first Trump administration.”
### Affected Countries and Justifications for Inclusion
The full ban restricts foreign nationals from entering the U.S. from 12 countries: Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen.
Heightened restrictions are applied to individuals from Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela.
The White House has stated that the countries included in the ban were identified as having deficiencies in their screening and vetting processes and were deemed to pose a ‘very high risk’ to the United States. Meanwhile, the countries facing partial restrictions are also considered to present a high level of risk.
The groundwork for the ban has been laid for an extended period. On his first day back in office, President Trump signed an executive order directing heads of various agencies, including the attorney general and the secretary of homeland security, to identify countries requiring either partial or complete suspension of admittance for their nationals due to inadequate vetting.
In the video announcing the ban, Trump mentioned that evaluations were based on several factors, including the large-scale presence of terrorists, lack of cooperation regarding visa security, inability to confirm travelers’ identities, poor record-keeping concerning criminal histories, and consistently high rates of visa overstays.
The White House noted that certain countries listed, such as Libya and Somalia, do not possess a competent or cooperative authority capable of issuing passports or civil documents.
For other listed countries, the fact sheet referred to a 2023 Department of Homeland Security report outlining overstay rates for B1/B2 visa holders (used for temporary business and tourism), which ranged from a notably low 7.69% for Cuba to as high as 49.54% for Chad.
However, while these percentages may seem alarming, they translate to a relatively insignificant number of overstayers, especially when juxtaposed with the number of travelers entering the U.S. from European and Asian countries exempt from visa requirements.
For instance, the Department of Homeland Security recorded a mere 2.4% overstay rate among visitors from Spain in the fiscal year 2023—amounting to over 20,000 people—while the nearly 50% overstay rate from Chad correlates to only 377 individuals.
### Enforcement Measures
The travel ban focuses on the visa application process, affecting applications that were already in progress in the banned countries.
In a directive issued last week, the State Department instructed U.S. embassies and consulates to avoid revoking any already issued visas to individuals from the 12 banned countries. However, the State Department clarified that individuals who have not yet received their visas, even if their applications were approved, will face denial.
Starting on Monday, visa applications from nationals of the banned countries will be rejected unless they fit into an exemption category.
Generally, individuals who are not U.S. citizens must present a valid visa or a waiver to enter the country; Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents hold the discretion to allow entry or deny access at the border.
The Department of Homeland Security characterized the ban as a necessary measure aimed at fostering cooperation from foreign authorities regarding the acceptance of deportation flights for their citizens, enhancing national security, and restoring integrity within the immigration system.
### Exemptions to the Ban
The new policy includes numerous exemptions for specific groups, such as lawful permanent residents, existing visa holders, and individuals whose entry aligns with U.S. national interests.
Exempt categories encompass dual nationals traveling with a passport from a non-banned country, children adopted by U.S. citizens, immediate family immigrants possessing solid evidence of their identity and family relationship, and Special Immigrant Visas for individuals who have long served the U.S. government abroad.
Additionally, the ban does not extend to members of athletic teams—including athletes, coaches, and their immediate family members—who are traveling for events like the World Cup, the Olympics, or other significant sporting occasions as determined by the Secretary of State. It is noteworthy that cities in the U.S. are set to host matches during the 2026 FIFA World Cup, with the 2028 Summer Olympics scheduled to occur in Los Angeles.
### Global Reactions and Criticism
The travel ban has incited criticism from multiple foreign leaders and international organizations, with Amnesty International categorizing the policy as “discriminatory, racist, and downright cruel.”
Some foreign leaders have urged the U.S. to reconsider its decision. The African Union Commission expressed concerns about the negative implications such measures might have on people-to-people relationships, educational exchanges, commercial interactions, and diplomatic relations that have taken decades to build.
In a statement, the African Union Commission invited the U.S. administration to adopt a more consultative strategy and engage in productive dialogue with the affected nations.
Certain African officials have expressed readiness to collaborate with the U.S. on this issue. Dahir Hassan Abdi, the Somali ambassador to the U.S., stated that Somalia is prepared to engage in talks to address raised concerns. Similarly, a spokesperson for the Republic of Congo articulated that their inclusion in the ban resulted from a misunderstanding that they hope will be rectified.
Conversely, leaders of some nations appear less willing to negotiate. Mahamat Idriss Deby, the president of Chad, publicly announced a suspension on issuing visas to U.S. citizens in response to the travel ban. He commented on Facebook, stating, “Chad has no planes to offer, no billions of dollars to give but Chad has his dignity and pride,” referencing a luxury jet that the Trump administration had utilized as Air Force One, which was accepted from Qatar.
In Venezuela, Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello issued a warning about the risks pertaining to being in the U.S., declaring, “If you’re really that foolish, then go to the United States,” and labeled the country as governed by “bad people.”
### Differences from Previous Travel Ban
This iteration of the travel ban contrasts sharply with the initial ban enacted in January 2017, which targeted seven predominantly Muslim countries—Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen—and was initially set for a duration of 90 days.
The original ban ignited widespread protests and legal battles, as it was perceived to be discriminatory against Muslims. Trump had previously publicly expressed intentions for a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States” during his campaign.
The 2017 ban was instituted abruptly, creating chaos at airports while certain travelers were already en route to the U.S.
According to immigration lawyer Mariam Masumi, the current ban has presented more advanced notice and has been implemented in a more orderly fashion, which has reduced public disruption and pushback, with less shock factor compared to its predecessor.
Masumi noted, “A significant difference here is that the first travel ban, Trump was openly saying very racist things, that he’s going to ban Muslims from the country. And at this point, people have gotten used to that, and there’s this fatigue and tiredness around it, and we’ve unfortunately gotten very used to these policies.”
The previous ban underwent several revisions to broaden its scope to include additional nations (such as North Korea and Venezuela) while excluding others, ultimately being endorsed by a slim 5-4 ruling from the Supreme Court the following year.
Masumi observed that the 2025 ban appears to be crafted with more precision and legal clarity, aimed at evading some of the previous version’s weaknesses. It provides specific exemptions, outlines available waiver options, and offers justification for including certain countries, all while avoiding explicit targeting of Muslim-majority nations.
Nevertheless, she stressed that the ban will produce adverse effects, particularly on families, workers, and refugees. “This is going to have a global impact, as well, on our reputation in the world,” she lamented. “And we’re basically closing our doors for immigrants, and it’s very unfortunate that this type of policy has become normalized.”
### Anticipated Legal Challenges
Experts predict that legal challenges are likely to arise in response to the latest travel ban. Lawyers specializing in immigration have been expecting such a policy to take effect and have prepared accordingly.
Masumi expressed her belief that while potential lawsuits are on the horizon, the administration has been meticulous in its construction of the ban.
Vladeck, the Georgetown Law professor, speculated that litigation may contest the factual bases for the administration’s choice of targeted countries, questioning whether the data cited by the Department of Homeland Security is accurate and justifiable.
He predicted lawsuits could originate from individuals already in the U.S. looking for clarity on their status or from applicants in other countries with strong legal claims to enter. Moreover, he suggested that the administration’s implementation of the ban could lead to actions that provoke further legal challenges.
Reflecting on the policy’s wording, he said, “I think the words of this policy are probably going to do relatively well in court, but I would not put it past this administration to enforce it in a way that invites further lawsuits.”
NPR’s Adrian Florido contributed to this report.
image source from：https://www.npr.org/2025/06/09/nx-s1-5427998/trump-travel-ban-countries-immigration-enforcement
