By Charles Pemu 
Washington D.C. – President Donald Trump’s sweeping new travel ban went into effect early Monday, immediately barring citizens from a dozen nations and imposing partial restrictions on seven others. The move, reviving a divisive measure from his first term, has ignited fresh controversy, raising questions about its true motivations beyond stated security concerns.
Announced last week, the restrictions were ostensibly spurred by a recent “terrorist attack” on Jews in Colorado, committed by a man identified by the White House as a visa overstayer. Trump asserted the ban was necessary to counter “extreme dangers” posed by foreign nationals not “properly vetted” or those who overstay their visas.
However, critics quickly pointed to the notable omission of Egypt from the ban list, despite the Colorado suspect being an Egyptian national. The comprehensive list of fully banned nations – Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, Congo-Brazzaville, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen – includes countries with adversarial relations with the U.S., as well as those facing severe humanitarian crises. Partially restricted nations include Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela.
The decision has immediately disrupted critical refugee pathways and further tightened immigration, drawing fierce condemnation. United Nations rights chief Volker Turk warned of concerns from an international law perspective, while US Democratic lawmakers blasted the ban as “draconian and unconstitutional.” An Afghan refugee expressed profound despair, feeling “trapped in uncertainty” by the new rules.
With exemptions only for athletes competing in the 2026 World Cup and 2028 Los Angeles Olympics, as well as diplomats, the ban marks a familiar return to restrictive immigration policies. Critics argue that while framed as a national security measure, its selective application and broad scope suggest a deeper political objective to reinforce a specific anti-immigration narrative.