Jump to content








New U.S. travel ban to spare green card holders - Trump official


rooster59

Recommended Posts

New U.S. travel ban to spare green card holders - Trump official

 

640x640 (3).jpg

Iranian citizen and U.S green card holder Cyrus Khosravi (R) meets his niece, Dena Khosravi (L, bottom), 2, for the first time while greeting his brother, Hamidreza Khosravi (L, top), after they were detained for additional screening following their arrival to Seattle-Tacoma International Airport to visit Cyrus, during a pause in U.S. President Donald Trump's travel ban in SeaTac, Washington, U.S. February 6, 2017. REUTERS/David Ryder

 

MUNICH (Reuters) - A new version of a Trump administration travel ban will not stop green card residency holders or travellers already on planes from entering the United States, U.S. Secretary for Homeland Security John Kelly said on Saturday.

U.S. President Donald Trump's initial attempt to clamp down for security reasons on immigration from seven Muslim-majority countries and on refugees snarled to a halt amid a judicial backlash and chaos at airports.

"The president is contemplating releasing a tighter, more streamlined version of the first (order). And I will have opportunity to work (on) a rollout plan, in particular to make sure that there's no one in a sense caught in the system of moving from overseas to our airports," Kelly said at the Munich Security Conference.

Asked whether green card residency permit holders would be allowed in, Kelly said: "It's a good assumption and, as far as the visas go, ... if they're in motion from some distant land to the United States, when they arrive they will be allowed in."

He promised "a short phase-in period to make sure that people on the other end don't get on airplanes. But if they're on an airplane and inbound, they'll be allowed to enter the country."

Trump's original order, which he said was meant to head off attacks by Islamist militants, barred people from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen from entering for 90 days and excluded all refugees for 120 days, except those from Syria, who were banned indefinitely.

The abrupt implementation of the order last month plunged the immigration system into chaos, sparking a wave of criticism from the countries affected, and from Western allies and some of America's leading corporations, especially technology firms.

 
reuters_logo.jpg
-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-02-19
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Reading the article seems to indicate that only those "already in motion" at the time the new order takes effect, may be allowed entry. And that after some short period, green-card holders from the seven countries would be denied boarding. I think.

 

but maybe he's referring to regular visa holders?

 

Maybe it will be rolled like a fine tuned machine, again?

 

 

 

 

Edited by mtls2005
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ummmm,   only about 3 weeks late.  It took Trump and the brightest people around him 3 weeks to realize that someone with a valid Green Card should always be allowed entry into the US.   I could have told them that in the first minute, but Trump doesn't want anyone with any intelligence near him.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Because green card holders could not be terrorists?

 

Boston bombing:

 

Elder brother........Green Card.

 

Younger brother........Naturalised Citizen.

 

The ban is an innefective, divisive (for the US), "comforter" for the xenophobic Trumpoid supporters, nothing more.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Enoon said:

 

Because green card holders could not be terrorists?

 

Boston bombing:

 

Elder brother........Green Card.

 

Younger brother........Naturalised Citizen.

 

The ban is an innefective, divisive (for the US), "comforter" for the xenophobic Trumpoid supporters, nothing more.

 

 

No.

 

Because green card holders will have already gone through an extensive screening process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am pro-immigration enforcement.  There are two-sides to that coin.  Illegals out.  However, anyone issued a US visa and/or green-card are in.  Doing otherwise makes legal immigration a farce.  The US needs to promote legal immigration.  Do it legally, and applicants should be welcomed with open arms and urged to assimilate into the 'great melting pot' that is America.  :thumbsup:

Edited by connda
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, connda said:

I am pro-immigration enforcement.  There are two-sides to that coin.  Illegals out.  However, anyone issued a US visa and/or green-card are in.  Doing otherwise makes legal immigration a farce.  The US needs to promote legal immigration.  Do it legally, and applicants should be welcomed with open arms and urged to assimilate into the 'great melting pot' that is America.  :thumbsup:

If Trump continues, It won't just be the US that is a 'melting pot' think of all his real estate opportunities when him and his family emerge from the Cheyenne mountain nuclear shelter in the Post Trump Nuclear Apocalypse (and no media left to bother him) - This could make a movie actually with his 3 little piggies to carry on the dynasty!

 

Anyway I digress. I still think there are going to be problems in the courts here. The fact is that "intent" for this to be a muslim ban has been shown and Giuliano is prime witness on record. So no amount of icing on the cake and rewording to allow legally entitled people to enter the country is going to change things. This is lipstick on a pig and I don't see it working. The Presidents intent was a Muslim ban and that is what the first lawyer will argue, and he really should win (the lawyer)!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Andaman Al said:

The Presidents intent was a Muslim ban and that is what the first lawyer will argue,

This is the real world problem that Trump and his advisors are going to have to deal with for the next four years, the Internet never forgets and if it tries to there is always a record

 

All those campaign sound bites are going to come back and bite this administration in the proverbial ass 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, connda said:

I am pro-immigration enforcement.  There are two-sides to that coin.  Illegals out.  However, anyone issued a US visa and/or green-card are in.  Doing otherwise makes legal immigration a farce.  The US needs to promote legal immigration.  Do it legally, and applicants should be welcomed with open arms and urged to assimilate into the 'great melting pot' that is America.  :thumbsup:

And how has past policy been different then what you advocate? Keeping mind the during Obama's 8 years more illegal immigrants were deported then ever before.

 

This belief that the US is facing some huge muslim/Mexican/Syrian  immigration issue is completely false and not supported by any facts. There are policies and procedures in place that are dealing with legal and illegal immigration to the US.

 

Assimilation takes generations, it does not happen quickly. 

 

This is nothing but  populist demogugary attacking an "other" to divert from the true issue which in my opinion is income inequality. Nothing that Trump or Ryan have discussed addresses that. In fact, if Ryan has his way, it will only get worse.

 

TH 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...