Trump's new ban dodges pitfalls faced by last attempt, experts say
There are some key differences, however.
The original travel ban suffered a series of legal defeats. This time, the policy appears to have been designed to avoid the same pitfalls.
Its predecessor, which targeted seven predominantly Muslim countries and was dubbed the "Muslim ban" by critics, was ordered just a week after Trump took office in 2017, during his first term in the White House.
The ban was amended twice to overcome court challenges, after opponents argued it was unconstitutional and illegal because it discriminated against travellers based on their religion.
A scaled-back version was eventually upheld by the Supreme Court in 2018, which this new ban closely resembles.
Legal experts told the BBC that it appeared Trump had learned lessons from his first attempt.
Christi Jackson, an expert in US immigration law at the London firm Laura Devine Immigration, said the new ban was more legally robust as a result.
While the first lacked "clarity", the new restrictions were "wider in scope" and had "clearly defined" exemptions, she said.
While there are some similarities in the nations chosen by the 2017 ban and the 2025 ban, Muslim-majority states are not the express target of the latest order.
Barbara McQuade, professor of law at the University of Michigan and former US attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan, told the BBC World Service's Newshour programme that, on this basis, it seemed likely to win the approval of the Supreme Court, if it was ever referred up to that level.
Trump's travel ban: Follow live updates
Everything we know about the ban so far
Why are these 12 countries on the list?
Trump suspends foreign student visas at Harvard
The 12 countries subject to the harshest restrictions from 9 June are mainly in the Middle East, Africa and the Caribbean, including Afghanistan, Iran and Somalia.
There will be partial restrictions on travellers from another seven countries, including Cuban and Venezuelan nationals.
Trump said the strength of the restrictions would be graded against the severity of the perceived threat, including from terrorism.
But besides Iran, none of the 12 countries hit by the outright ban are named on the US government's state sponsors of terrorism list.
In a video announcing the ban posted on X, Trump cited Sunday's incident in Boulder, Colorado, in which a man was accused of throwing Molotov cocktails at demonstrators attending a march for Israeli hostages.
The alleged attacker was an Egyptian national. However, Egypt does not appear on either list.
Trump also specified high rates of people overstaying their visas as a reason for listing certain countries.
However, Steven D Heller, an immigration lawyer based in the US, said there was a "lack of clarity" over what threshold had to be met by a country's overstaying rate in order for that country to be placed on Trump's ban list. That could be the basis for a successful legal challenge, he suggested.
"If they're relying on this notion of excessive overstay rates... they have to define what that actually means," he told the BBC.
Unlike the first ban, which was to last for only 90 to 120 days, today's order has no end date.
It has been met with dismay in the targeted countries.
Venezuela has described the Trump administration as "supremacists who think they own the world", though Somalia has pledged to "engage in dialogue to address the concerns raised".
The original ban spurred mass protests and sowed chaos at US airports.
It was repealed in 2021 by Trump's successor, President Joe Biden, who called the policy "a stain on our national conscience."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
a few seconds ago
- Newsweek
Donald Trump Disapproval Rating Hits New 2025 High
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Donald Trump's disapproval rating has climbed to its highest level of the year, according to newly released polling data. The latest ActiVote poll, conducted between July 1 and 31 among 454 respondents, put Trump's disapproval rating at 52.1 percent, up from 51.5 percent last month. Meanwhile, his approval rating has remained at 44.5 percent. Why It Matters Voters have in particular raised concerns about the administration's handling of the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein's case, as well as Trump's tariffs policies and his impact on the economy more broadly. File photo: Donald Trump gestures as he departs from the South Lawn of the White House., Friday, August 1, 2025 in Washington, D.C. File photo: Donald Trump gestures as he departs from the South Lawn of the White House., Friday, August 1, 2025 in Washington, D.C. Jacquelyn Martin/AP What To Know The latest data marks a stark reversal from earlier in the year, when Trump held a net positive approval rating. In January, 52 percent of Americans approved of his performance, while 46 percent disapproved—a net approval of +6. But that lead evaporated by March, and his numbers have since trended steadily downward. By April, Trump's disapproval rating had begun to consistently outpace approval, with 45 percent approving and 51 percent disapproving. After a brief improvement in May, his net approval dropped to -7 in both June and July. Despite the decline, July's numbers remain higher than Trump's average approval rating during his first term (41 percent), and also above President Biden's full-term average (41 percent) and his final-year rating (40 percent). Trump also maintains a net positive rating among rural voters, men, older Americans (50-plus), Republicans, white voters, and those with lower incomes, all of whom were crucial to his victory in 2024. Meanwhile, the politically crucial centrist group shifted back into net positive territory for Trump in July, giving him a +4 approval rating, up from -6 last month. However, approval within his own base has slipped: support among the moderate right and right dropped to 82 percent, down 4 points from June. Epstein Scandal Rekindles Public Scrutiny The fallout from the Jeffrey Epstein scandal continues to cast a shadow over Trump and his administration. Polls have shown that a bipartisan majority of voters, including MAGA supporters, now believe that the government should release all files related to Epstein, with many suspecting a cover-up. Epstein, a wealthy financier and convicted sex offender, died by suicide in jail in August 2019 while awaiting trial on sex-trafficking charges. There is no evidence that Trump was involved in Epstein's crimes. Trump has acknowledged knowing the man in the 1990s and early 2000s but maintains that he cut ties with him well before Epstein's 2006 arrest. A recent Wall Street Journal report uncovered a 2003 birthday card Trump allegedly sent to Epstein. The card included a drawing of a naked woman and the message: "We have certain things in common … may every day be another wonderful secret." The discontent intensified when a Justice Department memo last month confirmed Epstein died by suicide in 2019 and that the government does not possess a "client list"—directly contradicting conspiracy theories promoted by some Trump-aligned figures. Trump reportedly lashed out at his own supporters, calling them "weaklings" for being "duped" by what he called a "hoax" pushed by Democrats. He later walked back the comments and directed Attorney General Pam Bondi to begin the process of unsealing grand jury materials related to Epstein. Economic Worries Add To Pressure Economic concerns are also causing a headache for the Trump administration, with multiple recent polls showing a downward trend in the president's approval rating on his handling of the economy and inflation. Inflation rose to 2.7 percent in June, and job growth slowed sharply in July, with just 73,000 new jobs added—down from 147,000 the previous month, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The unemployment rate edged up to 4.2 percent, though it remains near historic lows. Amid those concerns, other polls have also shown Trump's approval rating sliding to lows. The latest Reuters/Ipsos poll showed that Trump's approval rating had dropped to 40 percent, with 56 percent disapproving, giving him a net approval rating of -16 points. The latest YouGov/Economist poll also showed Trump's approval rating at its lowest level yet, with 40 percent approving and 55 percent disapproving. And a new Zogby Strategies poll also showed Trump's overall approval rating had slipped to an all-time low, with just 43 percent of voters approving of his performance, while 54 percent disapproved, marking a net approval rating of -11 points. That is down from -8 net approval in June and -1 in May. Poll Date Approve Disapprove ActiVote July 1-31 45 52 RMG Research July 23-31 50 48 John Zogby Strategies July 28-29 43 54 YouGov/Economist July 25-28 40 55 Ipsos/Reuters July 25-27 40 56 Morning Consult July 25-27 47 50 McLaughlin and Associates July 21-24 47 54 Quantus Insights July 21-23 47 50 Emerson College July 21-22 46 47 Trafalgar Group/Insider Advantage July 22-23 50 48 But other polls show slight improvements: Morning Consult has Trump at 47 percent approval, with net approval rising to -3 from -7. Newsweek's poll tracker shows a similar uptick, with his net approval at -5 (46 percent approve; 51 percent disapprove), up from -7 yesterday and -10 last week. What Happens Next Trump's approval rating will continue to fluctuate throughout his term in office as he implements his policy agenda. Whether it falls enough to impact the Republican Party in the November 2026 midterms remains to be seen.
Axios
a few seconds ago
- Axios
Trump's authoritarian streak
A five-alarm fire tore through the economic establishment Friday after President Trump ousted the government's top labor statistician, accusing her — without evidence — of "rigging" a weak jobs report. Why it matters: It's just one glaring example from a week that bore many authoritarian hallmarks — purging dissenters, rewriting history, criminalizing opposition and demanding total institutional loyalty. The big picture: The overwhelming, all-consuming nature of Trump-driven news cycles makes it difficult to discern partisan hysteria from true democratic backsliding. But apply any of these five storylines from the past week to a foreign leader — or even a past U.S. president — and it reads like an authoritarian playbook. 1. Trump fired Bureau of Labor Statistics commissioner Erika McEntarfer, a 20-year government veteran, after BLS announced massive downward revisions for job growth in May and June. "We're doing so well. I believe the numbers were phony. ... So you know what I did: I fired her," Trump told reporters, without explaining why he believed past jobs reports were credible when they were positive. William Beach, who led the BLS during Trump's first term, blasted the firing as "totally groundless" and warned of a "dangerous precedent" of politicized economic data. 2. Eager to shift scrutiny from his handling of the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, Trump has demanded his Justice Department prosecute former President Obama for "treason" over the 2016 Russia investigation. Top Trump aides are engaged in an all-out effort to rewrite the history of "Russiagate" and exact revenge on Obama-era intelligence officials, including through criminal referrals. 3. In his crackdown on liberal power centers, Trump has extracted more than $1.2 billion in settlements from 13 of the most elite players in academia, law, media and tech, as Axios reported this week. The Trump administration is reportedly eyeing up to $500 million from Harvard and $100 million from Cornell, paving the way for a cascade of other universities to follow suit. 4. Dozens of Venezuelan migrants deported to El Salvador's notorious CECOT megaprison say they were beaten, sexually assaulted and denied access to lawyers and medical care, according to a Post investigation. Many of the men had no criminal records and had entered the U.S. legally — some with refugee status or temporary protected status, according to the Post. Human rights experts say the reported abuse may violate international law, and raise serious questions about the Trump administration's responsibility for alleged torture on foreign soil. 5. Trump's months-long campaign to oust Fed Chair Jay Powell, or at least pressure him to cut interest rates, is still lingering. Trump's stream of insults, which escalated after the Fed held rates steady this week, has prompted comparisons to Turkey's disastrous experiment with bringing its central bank under political control. What they're saying:" President Trump is holding the federal government and elite institutions accountable for their political games, longstanding corruption, and terrible incompetence," White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers said in a statement. With regard to CECOT, a White House official told Axios: "These are criminal terrorist illegal immigrants and the American people are safer with them as far away as possible. President Trump is putting the safety of Americans first." Between the lines: Trump has little reason to curtail his maximalist impulses. Vast swaths of society are falling in line: The Smithsonian, for example, quietly removed references to Trump's two impeachments from its presidential exhibit last month, the Washington Post reported. The museum says the exhibit was always meant to be temporary, but its content review comes after Trump signed an executive order in March ordering the removal of "improper ideology" from Smithsonian properties. Trump's consolidation of power also comes at the same time he's attempting to unilaterally reset the global trading order — with tariff rates set to his personal whim. Brazil now faces 50% tariffs — among the highest rates of any country — due to its prosecution of former President Jair Bolsonaro, which Trump has denounced as a "witch hunt." The stakes of Trump's centralized command were accentuated Friday, when he ordered two nuclear submarines repositioned in response to saber-rattling by former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev.
San Francisco Chronicle
a few seconds ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Limited options for Democrats to retaliate if Texas Republicans redraw congressional map
WASHINGTON (AP) — As Republicans move to redraw legislative maps in red states to pad their narrow House majority in Washington, some Democrats are rethinking their embrace of a nonpartisan approach to line-drawing that now complicates their party's ability to hit back before next year's midterm elections. In many Democratic-controlled states, independent commissions rather than the state legislature handle redistricting, the normally-once-a-decade task of adjusting congressional and legislative districts so their populations are equal. Parties in the majority can exploit that process to shape their lawmakers' districts so they are almost guaranteed reelection. The commission model limits parties' ability to game the system, leading to more competitive districts. Not all redistricting commissions were created at Democrats' insistence. And, like Republicans, the party has exploited line-drawing for its own gain in the handful of states where it controls the process. But unlike Republicans, many Democratic Party leaders have embraced the nonpartisan model. That means Democrats have fewer options to match Republicans, who are redrawing the U.S. House map in Texas at President Donald Trump's urging to carve out as many asfive new winnable seats for the GOP. That could be enough to prevent Democrats from winning back the majority next year. Democrats have threatened payback. During a gathering Friday in Wisconsin of Democratic governors, several of them said they wanted to retaliate because the stakes are so high. Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers, who has pushed for a nonpartisan redistricting commission in his state, said Democrats must 'do whatever we can' to counter the Republican efforts to redraw congressional maps. 'When you have a gun against your head, you've got to do something,' he said. Despite the ambitious talk, Democrats largely have their hands tied. Democratic states have limited ability to redistrict for political edge California Gov. Gavin Newsom has said he and the Democratic-controlled Legislature will try to redraw his state's congressional map. But they would need to repeal or defy the 2008 ballot measure creating an independent redistricting commission. Voters extended its authority to congressional districts two years later. Newsom supported the constitutional amendment at the time, when he was mayor of San Francisco. The Texas redistricting, which is expected to pass the Legislature next week, led him to modify that position. 'We can act holier than thou, we can sit on the sidelines, talk about the way the world should be, or we can recognize the existential nature that is this moment,' Newsom said earlier this month. In New York, which also has a commission, the state constitution bars another map this decade. Democrats have moved for a change, but that could not happen until 2027 at the earliest, and then only with voter approval. In other states where Democrats control the governor's office and legislature, including Colorado and Washington, the party has backed independent commissions that cannot redraw, let alone rig, maps in the middle of the decade. Democrats say 'foundations of our democracy' at stake When the redistricting cycle kicked off in 2021, after the last census, independent commissions were in charge of drawing 95 House seats that otherwise would have been drawn by Democrats, but only 13 that would have been created by Republicans. In a marker of the shift among Democrats, former Attorney General Eric Holder, who heads the party's redistricting effort and has called repeatedly for a more nonpartisan approach, seemed to bless his party's long shot efforts to overrule their commissions. 'We do not oppose – on a temporary basis – responsible, responsive actions to ensure that the foundations of our democracy are not permanently eroded,' Holder said in a statement last week. In states where they weren't checked by commissions, Democrats have redistricted just as ruthlessly as Republicans. In Illinois, they drew a map that gave them a 14-3 advantage in the congressional delegation. In New Mexico, they tweaked the map so they control all three House seats. In Nevada, they held three of its four seats in November despite Trump winning the state. Even in states where they have a lopsided advantage, Democrats are exploring ways to maximize it. On Friday, Maryland's House Majority Leader, Democratic Del. David Moon, said he would introduce legislation to trigger redrawing of the congressional lines if Texas moves forward. Democrats hold seven of the state's eight congressional seats. 'We can't have one state, especially a very large state, constantly trying to one-up and alter the course of congressional control while the other states sit idly by," he said. Commissions promote 'fair representation,' advocates say Advocates of a nonpartisan model are alarmed by the shift among Democrats. They say the party would redistrict just as aggressively as the GOP if not held in check, depriving voters of a voice in districts whose winners would essentially be selected in advance by political leaders. 'We're very desperate — we're looking for any port in a storm,' said Emily Eby French, Common Cause's Texas director. 'This Democratic tit for tat redistricting seems like a port but it's not a port. It's a jagged rock with a bunch of sirens on them.' The group's director of redistricting, Dan Vicuña, said using redistricting for partisan advantage — known as gerrymandering — is highly unpopular with the public: 'This is about fair representation for communities." Politicians used to shy away from discussing it openly, but that has changed in today's polarized environment. Trump earlier this month told reporters about his hopes of netting five additional GOP seats in Texas and more out of other Republican-controlled states. He has urged new maps in GOP-controlled states such as Indiana and Missouri, while Ohio Republicans are poised to reshape political lines after neutralizing a push to create an independent redistricting commission. Democrats are divided over how to respond to Texas In a sign of the party's divide, Democrats have continued to push for a national redistricting panel that would remove partisanship from the process, even as some call for retaliation against Republicans in defiance of state limitations. 'No unilateral disarmament till both sides are following the law,' said Arizona Sen. Ruben Gallego, like Newsom a possible 2028 presidential contender, wrote on X. Gallego's post came a day before his Democratic colleagues gathered to announce they were reintroducing a bill to create the national commission. An identical bill died in 2022 when it couldn't overcome Republican objections despite Democrats controlling Congress and the presidency. It has no chance now that the GOP is in charge of both branches. Sen. Chris Murphy, another potential 2028 contender, didn't express regret over past reforms that have implemented independent redistricting boards in Democratic states, saying the party "should never apologize for being for the right thing.' But he added that Republicans 'are operating outside of the box right now and we can't stay inside the box.' 'If they're changing districts in the middle of the 10-year cycle, we have to do the same thing,' he said. That approach, however, hasn't caught on across the party. 'We shouldn't stoop to their tactics,' Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut said. 'It's an ideal that we have accurate and fair representation. We can't abandon it just because Republicans try to manipulate and distort it.' ___ Riccardi reported from Denver. Associated Press writers Scott Bauer in Madison, Wisconsin, Jaimie Ding in Los Angeles, Anthony Izaguirre in Albany, New York, and Brian Witte in Annapolis, Maryland, contributed to this report.
