President Donald trump has expressed determination to issue he raised in the early days of his presidency and caused the most serious disagreements. He signed a new decree on temporary prohibition on entry into the United States the inhabitants of the countries which, according to him, creates a high risk of terrorism.
Compared to the decree signed in January, which has caused confusion and unrest throughout the country and was suspended by the Federal court, in a new document there are several key differences. As stated in the certificate of the Ministry of internal security, the decree provides for the ban to enter the USA for 90 days for citizens of the six predominantly Muslim countries — Sudan, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia and Yemen. In the new list is not specified Iraq, which was in the original list.
As stated by the Ministry decree, which takes effect March 16, and compared with the previous provides the conditions for a more organized implementation, no restrictions on re-entry to the USA for persons who have been legally granted a residence permit, or green card. In the execution of the first decree in individual cases initially had problems. The new decree also allows entry to USA people who received visas to 27 January (i.e., before the issuance of the first decree) or earlier. It also cancels the effect of the previous decree.
“This new Ordinance will strengthen the security of the US and its allies,” he said on Monday to journalists by the Secretary of state Rex Tillerson (Rex Tillerson).
Trump claims that the restrictions that are imposed under one of his key campaign promises about the conduct of “enhanced inspections” necessary to prevent terrorist acts on the territory of the United States. Critics argue that these measures are a prohibition of a religious nature, based on the pre-election rhetoric trump’s directed against Muslims, and terrorism can lead to the opposite results.
The President was assailed with reproaches of judges that suspended the original decree, and the White house has prepared a document, signed on Monday, which is not as vulnerable to criticism of lawyers. It is still not clear how effective it will be changes in this regard.
As stated in the signed on Monday the decree, the previous document signed in January, “was not dictated by hostility against any religion.” It also has no previous provision according to which the advantage was provided to refugees from religious minorities.
According to the new decree, shall be suspended for 120 days and the program of all refugees. This decree, unlike the previous, does not provide for the suspension indefinitely of the program receiving, for example, Syrian refugees.
Trump has signed a decree on Monday, and representatives of news agencies were not invited, and the reason the White house didn’t explain. The President signed the most of its previous orders in the presence of journalists, key media. Spokesman Sean Spicer (Sean Spicer) has placed in his microblog on Twitter a photo of trump’s signing the decree.
The representative of the Ministry of internal security said that his Department will conduct “General analysis by countries… information about individuals and security”, which each country submits to the United States in the granting of visas. To optimize standards of the United States will take those countries a period of 50 days. According to the decree, does not exclude further “expansion of the list of countries”, in respect of which the United States can impose additional restrictions.
“Unregulated entry into the country without scrutiny is not a universal privilege, especially when at stake is national security,” he said, speaking to reporters, the Minister of internal security John Kelly (John Kelly).
Regardless of changes, restrictions on entry is likely to immediately trigger a heated debate. After the end of January, was signed the original document, Democrats, human rights activists and some Republicans have criticized trump for the decree and the decision to immediately put it into effect.
.@POTUS has signed a new executive order that will keep the nation safe. Read it at https://t.co/XcBwwEJJHF pic.twitter.com/Yx2mikXl2A
— Sean Spicer (@PressSec) on March 6, 2017
At airports across the country, protests erupted. Was there detained for many holders of valid visas.
In February, Kelly said that he would have little to postpone the execution of a decree” after the lawmakers expressed concern over the fact that they are ignorant and don’t know what to do.
On Monday, attorney General Jeff sessions (Jeff Sessions) he defended the rights of the President for the publication of both new and original orders.
Leading Democrats have begun to criticize the restrictions on entry into the country shortly after trump signed the decree. In a statement, the Democrat from the state of new York and Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer (Chuck Schumer) called the move “cowardly and anti-American”.
“Relaxed the ban is still a ban,” he said, adding that, in his opinion, this decree reduces the security of the United States.
Schumer said that, because after graciously accepted speech trump (in Congress) the White house decided to postpone the signing of the decree, “it has absolutely nothing to do with national security.”
The leader of the Democrats in the house of representatives Nancy Pelosi (Nancy Pelosi) of California also said that the decree undermines security, calling it “the same ban for the same purpose”.
In connection with the signing of the first variant of the decree the state of Washington has filed a lawsuit against the administration of the tramp and that was the reason for the suspension of its action. In his statement on Monday, the attorney General Bob Ferguson (Bob Ferguson) said that the state government is “carefully studying a new decree to find out what are its implications for Washington state, and determine our subsequent legal actions.”
The American Union of civil liberties who have also opposed the original decree, collapsed on Monday sharply criticized the new decree. Jadwat Omar (Omar Jadwat), who heads the Union’s project on immigrant rights, called the document “a stripped-down version, which repeat the same fatal mistakes”.
