The White House said the restrictions follow a review of information sharing by foreign governments.

Donald Trump issued a presidential proclamation late on Sunday.

“Making America safe is my number one priority. We will not admit those into our country we cannot safely vet,” Mr Trump said.

The restrictions on Venezuelans apply only to government officials and their family members.

The three new countries join five others from Mr Trump’s original travel ban: Iran, Libya, Syria, Yemen, and Somalia. But the new proclamation removed restrictions that were placed on Sudan.

Mr Trump’s original ban was highly controversial, as it affected six majority-Muslim countries, and was widely labelled a “Muslim ban”.

It was subject to a range of legal challenges and several large-scale protests, and is due to be considered by the US Supreme Court in October, having been partly reinstated in July.

The American Civil Liberties Union rights group said the addition of the new countries “doesn’t obfuscate the real fact that the administration’s order is still a Muslim ban”.

It is not yet clear how the president’s new proclamation, which changes several key elements, will affect that legal challenge.

–

Source: BBC

The post US expands travel ban to include North Korea appeared first on Citi 97.3 FM - Relevant Radio. Always.

The US government will now contact individuals turned away at borders as a result of the executive order that came into force on 27 January.

The agreement does not guarantee that applicants will receive new visas.

Mr Trump signed the original order in January barring people from seven Muslim countries from entering the US.

The move sparked numerous protests and legal challenges.

Mr Trump later defended the executive order, saying it was “not a Muslim ban”.

A week after it was implemented, a federal judge in Seattle suspended it nationwide, allowing banned visitors to travel to the US, pending an appeal by the administration.

The new legal agreement, which was announced on Thursday, obliges the US government to act in “good faith” when processing the paperwork of all applicants.

The seven countries affected by the initial 90-day travel ban were Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. Iraq was later removed from the list.

Some visa categories, such as diplomats and UN workers, were not included in the suspension.

Among the individuals initially barred from entry to the US were two Iraqi nationals; Hameed Khalid Darweesh and Haider Sameer Abdulkhaleq Alshawi.

They were stopped and detained on arrival at John F Kennedy airport in New York.

Human rights groups, including the National Immigration Law Centre (NILC) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), filed a lawsuit in New York to demand the release of the two men, who were in the air bound for the US when the executive order was signed.

Mr Darweesh, who had worked as a US Army interpreter, was later released by border officials.

“Although the government dragged its feet for far too long, it has finally agreed to do the right thing,” said Lee Gelernt, of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

The settlement, Mr Gelernt says, provides those excluded under the first Muslim ban with “proper notice of their right to come to the United States”.

He added that while this was progress, the “legal fight against Muslim ban 2.0” would continue with a Supreme Court hearing in October.

Hundreds of nationals from the countries affected by the ban in January were detained on arrival despite having valid visas and residency documents.

The move was suspended on 3 February after it was challenged in court.

On 6 March, Mr Trump attempted to revise the ban on individuals from the six countries to include grandparents and other relatives of US residents.

In July, the US Supreme Court rejected the Trump administration’s revised executive order but judges gave the government the right to enforce a separate ban on refugees, pending a government appeal against a federal court order.

–

Source: BBC

The post Trump travel ban: People denied entry to US can reapply appeared first on Citi 97.3 FM - Relevant Radio. Always.

It means people without “close” family or business relationships in the US could be denied visas and barred entry.

Lawyers took up positions at US airports, offering free advice.

But there was no sign of the chaos that affected travellers when the first version of the ban was brought in at a few hours’ notice in January.

That is because the executive order does not affect people who already have valid visas or green cards.

The Department of Homeland Security said it expected “business as usual at our ports of entry”.

Monday’s Supreme Court ruling upheld the temporary ban, a key Trump policy.

But the judges provided a major exception, for those who have “a credible claim of a bona fide relationship” with someone in the US.

The effect is that citizens of the affected countries with a close relative in the US, such as a spouse, parent, child or sibling, will potentially be allowed in.

In a last minute change, the Trump administration extended the definition of close family to include fiancés.

However grandparents, aunts, uncles, nephews and nieces are not considered to be “bona fide” relations.

The rules apply to people from Iran, Libya, Syria, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen, as well as to all refugees.

Moments before the ban began at 20:00 Washington time on Thursday (00:00 GMT), it emerged that the state of Hawaii had asked a federal judge for clarification.

Hawaii’s attorney general has argued that the definition of “close family” is too narrow and may improperly prevent people from travelling to the US.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) said it would be closely monitoring the guidance and implementation of the order.
The Supreme Court is expected to make a final decision on the ban when its next session begins in October.

According to the new rules, for the next 90 days those from the six countries without a close relationship will not be able to enter the US.

IN – a parent, spouse, fiancé, child, son- or daughter-in-law, or sibling, including step- or half-siblings.

OUT – grandparents, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, in-laws, extended family and grandchildren.

Also exempt from the new rules are those with business or educational ties to the US.
However, the guidelines specifically state that the relationship must be formal, documented and not formed for the purpose of evading the order.

As well as making clear that those with valid visas and legal permanent residents are not affected, the Department of Homeland Security says dual nationals who travel on their passport from the unaffected country will also be allowed entry.

What about refugees?
The Supreme Court also approved a 120-day ban on refugees entering the US, allowing the government to bar entry to refugee claimants who cannot prove the same ties to an American individual or entity.

But opponents of the ban point out that refugees are invited to relocate in the US by the UN Refugee Agency, which has well-documented relationships with the people they refer for resettlement.

It remains unclear how many refugees scheduled to resettle in the US will be affected, but the government will fully halt the programme once its quota of 50,000 refugees for the budget year ending in September is met.

How did we get here?
The US president insisted his ban was necessary for national security and pointed to terrorist attacks in Paris, London, Brussels and Berlin as evidence.

However, critics called the policy un-American and Islamophobic, and said that this ban would not have stopped atrocities in the US perpetrated by American-born attackers.

The original ban, released on 27 January, provoked mass protests at American airports.

It included Iraq among nations whose travellers would be barred from the US, and imposed a full ban on refugees from Syria.

The president issued a revised version with a narrower scope on 6 March to overcome some of the legal problems.

The policy was left in limbo after it was struck down by federal judges in Hawaii and Maryland.

–

Source: BBC

The post Trump travel ban comes into effect for six countries appeared first on Citi 97.3 FM - Relevant Radio. Always.

America’s highest court also granted a White House request allowing part of its refugee ban to go into effect.

The justices said they would consider in October whether the president’s policy should be upheld or struck down.
Mr Trump seeks to place a 90-day ban on people from six mainly Muslim nations and a 120-day ban on refugees.

The president welcomed the ruling’s qualified authorisation to bar visitors from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen, which he described as “terror-prone countries”.

“As president, I cannot allow people into our country who want to do us harm,” he added.

Mr Trump has already said the ban would take effect within 72 hours of court approval.

What does the ruling say?
The Supreme Court said in Monday’s decision: “In practical terms, this means that [the executive order] may not be enforced against foreign nationals who have a credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States.

“All other foreign nationals are subject to the provisions of [the executive order].”

The ruling also said it would permit a 120-day ban on all refugees entering the US to go into effect, allowing the government to bar entry to refugee claimants who do not have any “bona fide relationship” with an American individual or entity.

What does ‘bona fide’ relationship mean?
The ruling clarifies that those who would be deemed to have such a relationship would include a foreign national who wishes to enter the US to live with or visit a family member, a student at an American university, an employee of a US company, or a lecturer invited to address an American audience.

This would not apply, it said, to “someone who enters into a relationship simply to avoid [the executive order].

“For example, a non-profit group devoted to immigration issues may not contact foreign nationals from the designated countries, add them to client lists, and then secure their entry by claiming injury from their exclusion.”

–

Source: BBC

The post Trump travel ban injunction partly lifted by top US court appeared first on Citi 97.3 FM - Relevant Radio. Always.

Judge Derrick Watson’s ruling means Mr Trump will be barred from enforcing the ban on six mostly Muslim nations while it is contested in court.

In a lawsuit, the US state says the ban would harm tourism and the ability to recruit foreign students and workers.

President Trump says his revised travel ban seeks to prevent terrorists from entering the United States.

Judge Watson made the ruling late on Wednesday after hearing arguments from attorneys for the state of Hawaii and the US Department of Justice.

The judge turned his earlier temporary restraining order into a preliminary injunction that would have a more lasting effect.

President Trump’s executive order on 6 March would have placed a 90-day ban on people from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen and a 120-day ban on refugees.

An earlier version of the order, issued in late January, sparked confusion and protests, and was blocked by a judge in Seattle.

Other courts across the US have issued different rulings on Mr Trump’s revised ban, with a judge in Maryland halting a part of the ban earlier this month.

Mr Trump has complained of “unprecedented judicial overreach”, pledging to take the case “as far as it needs to go”.

An appeal against the Hawaii decision would be expected to go next to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals – the same court which in February said it would not block a ruling by a Seattle court to halt the original travel ban.

–

Source: BBC

The post Hawaii judge places indefinite hold appeared first on Citi 97.3 FM - Relevant Radio. Always.

Mr Trump signed an executive order placing a 90-day ban on people from six mainly Muslim countries on Monday.

New York maintains the new directive is a ban on Muslims while Washington says it is harmful to the state. Oregon and Massachusetts later also joined.

The ban begins on 16 March, with the White House saying it is “very confident” of winning in court.

Mr Trump’s original order was more expansive but it was defeated after a legal challenge initially mounted by Washington and Minnesota.

What states this time and why?

Oregon – said the order hurts residents, employers, universities health care system and economy

Washington – it has “same illegal motivations as the original” and harms residents, although fewer than the first ban

New York – “a Muslim ban by another name”, said the attorney general

Massachusetts – new ban “remains a discriminatory and unconstitutional attempt to make good on his campaign promise to implement a Muslim ban”

Hawaii – argued it would harm its Muslim population, tourism and foreign students

The revised ban bars new visas for people from: Somalia, Iran, Syria, Sudan, Libya and Yemen. It also temporarily blocks all refugees.

The previous order, which Mr Trump signed in January, was blocked in federal courts and sparked mass protests as well as confusion at airports.

But critics maintain the revised travel ban discriminates against Muslims.

“President Trump’s latest executive order is a Muslim ban by another name, imposing policies and protocols that once again violate the Equal Protection Clause and Establishment Clause of the United State Constitution,” said New York Attorney General Eric T Schneiderman after announcing his legal challenge.

Washington state Attorney General Bob Ferguson, who was the first to sue over the original ban, said he would ask a federal judge to rule that the temporary restraining order halting the first travel ban “remains in effect”.

“We’re asserting that the president cannot unilaterally declare himself free of the court’s restraining order and injunction,” he said.

Though the White House has faced mounting criticism over its immigration orders, Trump supporters say the president is fulfilling his campaign promises to protect Americans.

What is different about the new order?

Citizens of Iran, Libya, Syria, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen, the other six countries on the original 27 January order, will once more be subject to a 90-day travel ban.

Iraq has been taken off the banned list because its government has boosted visa screening and data sharing, White House officials said.

The new directive says refugees already approved by the State Department can enter the US. It also lifts an indefinite ban on all Syrian refugees.

Green Card holders (legal permanent residents of the US) from the named countries will not be affected.

The new order does not give priority to religious minorities, unlike the previous directive.

Critics of the Trump administration had argued that this was an unlawful policy showing preference to Christian refugees.

–

Source: BBC

The post More US states challenge Trump travel ban appeared first on Citi 97.3 FM - Relevant Radio. Always.

The state department said it was reversing the cancellation of visas, 60,000 of which were revoked after President Donald Trump’s order.

Judge James Robart ruled there were legal grounds to challenge the ban.

Mr Trump reacted furiously, calling Mr Robart’s ruling “ridiculous” and vowing to restore his ban.

People affected by the ban treated news of the suspension warily as airlines began allowing them to board flights to America on Saturday.

‘Don’t degrade us’

Dr Samuel Jacob, of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, was born in Syria. His Syrian wife has been unable to join him.

“I am going to meet with my attorney on Tuesday and he will know the latest information about whether my wife can try to come.

“It’s hard to really understand the detail of this ruling without speaking to my lawyer and so I can’t make a decision about what we can do until then.

“I live and work hard every day in the US to serve everybody and save lives but at the end of the day I still get classified by the government as simply an “x” or a “y” and treated accordingly.

“I work hard for the US and I expect the USA to help me and protect me and let me be with my family, not be degraded in this way.”

The ban’s implementation was halted with immediate effect by Judge Robart’s ruling, in which he found that legal challenges to the ban launched by two states, Washington and Minnesota, were likely to succeed.

Homeland Security Department employees were told by the department to comply with the ruling immediately.

Customs officials told airlines that they could resume boarding banned travellers. Within hours, Qatar Airways said it would do so, followed by Air France, Etihad Airways, Lufthansa and others.

“The opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law-enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned!” Mr Trump said on Twitter.

“When a country is no longer able to say who can, and who cannot , come in & out, especially for reasons of safety & security – big trouble!” he tweeted separately.

The US administration argues that his executive order last week, which caused confusion and anger, is designed to protect the US.

It is expected to seek an emergency stay that would restore the restrictions.

‘We made it’

“I am very happy that we are going to travel today,” Fuad Sharef, an Iraqi with an immigration visa who was prevented along with his family from boarding a flight to New York a week ago, told Reuters news agency from Irbil on Saturday. “Finally, we made it.”

A cardiologist training in the US, who wished to remain anonymous, told BBC News his Syrian wife had recently joined him but people in her situation would not “take the risk of leaving the country in case things change back again”.

Among those expected to travel soon is an Iranian infant with a heart defect who had been due to undergo life-saving surgery in the US.

The family of four-month-old Fatemeh Reshad flew her to Dubai last week to get a visa to enter the US, but this was denied under Mr Trump’s ban.

The girl will now be allowed into the country and doctors have pledged to treat her for free, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said late on Friday.

Mr Trump’s order imposed an indefinite ban on Syrian refugees. Anyone arriving from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan or Yemen faces a 90-day visa suspension.

Washington state Attorney General Bob Ferguson described the move as unconstitutional.

“Folks who had visas, folks who were allowed to travel were denied that right without any due process whatsoever – that’s un-American and unconstitutional,” he said in a BBC interview.

Courts in at least four other states – Virginia, New York, Massachusetts and Michigan – are hearing cases challenging Mr Trump’s executive order.

In London, protesters converged on the US embassy in Grosvenor Square on Saturday to vent their anger over the travel ban.

–

Source: BBC

The post US reverses travel ban over court ruling as Trump fumes appeared first on Citi 97.3 FM - Relevant Radio. Always.