President Trump’s Executive Order on Refugees

Yesterday, I was on the road and didn’t get home until late last night, so I missed the big uproar over Trump’s executive order on refugees and visas:

“Washington (CNN) With just a few quick strokes of the pen, President Donald Trump on Friday banned — temporarily, for now — more than 134 million people from entering the United States.

Trump barred citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the US for at least the next 90 days by executive order, which a senior White House official said later Friday is likely just a first step toward establishing a broader ban.

It’s unclear how many more countries will be added to the list, but the official said the administration will be “very aggressive” as it weighs how many more countries to add to the list.

Asked what criteria the administration will consider as it looks to expand the ban beyond the initial seven countries, the official said simply the “mandate is to keep America safe.” …”

As David French points out, it is not a sweeping Muslim ban. It is only a temporary fix and barely changes the number of refugees admitted to the United States:

“First, the order temporarily halts refugee admissions for 120 days to improve the vetting process, then caps refugee admissions at 50,000 per year. Outrageous, right? Not so fast. Before 2016, when Obama dramatically ramped up refugee admissions, Trump’s 50,000 stands roughly in between a typical year of refugee admissions in George W. Bush’s two terms and a typical year in Obama’s two terms …

In 2002, the United States admitted only 27,131 refugees. It admitted fewer than 50,000 in 2003, 2006, and 2007. As for President Obama, he was slightly more generous than President Bush, but his refugee cap from 2013 to 2015 was a mere 70,000, and in 2011 and 2012 he admitted barely more than 50,000 refugees himself. …”

Read the full text of the executive order.

President Trump appears to be testing the waters here. He’s ginning up hysteria over something really small and quite moderate. The White House has said this is “just a first step.” Regardless, a federal judge has already pounced and blocked part of the order:

“WASHINGTON — A federal judge in Brooklyn came to the aid of scores of refugees and others who were trapped at airports across the United States on Saturday after an executive order signed by President Trump, which sought to keep many foreigners from entering the country, led to chaotic scenes across the globe.

The judge’s ruling blocked part of the president’s actions, preventing the government from deporting some arrivals who found themselves ensnared by the presidential order. But it stopped short of letting them into the country or issuing a broader ruling on the constitutionality of Mr. Trump’s actions.

The high-stakes legal case played out on Saturday amid global turmoil, as the executive order signed by the president slammed shut the borders of the United States for an Iranian scientist headed to a lab in Massachusetts, a Syrian refugee family headed to a new life in Ohio and countless others across the world. …”

The block only covers a handful of people who were caught in transit. It doesn’t affect anyone who hasn’t yet traveled to the United States. Still, the Fake News media is showering Judge Ann Donnelly with praise in order to encourage more federal judges to subvert President Trump’s immigration agenda:

“Andrew M. Lankler, a partner at Baker Botts LLP, who served in the office from 1990 to 1996, said, “She’s an extremely intelligent, deliberative and conscientious person uniquely unswayed by anything other than justice.”

Daniel J. Horwitz, a partner at McLaughlin & Stern LLP, who worked in the district attorney’s office from 1991 to 2000, described her in a message as “tenacious, exceedingly bright but eminently fair with an even temperament.”

He added, “She’s exactly the type of judge you want to appear in front of.” …”

I’ve got some catching up to do on this.

Yesterday, I was with Michael Cushman and several other veterans of the League of the South’s Murfreesboro and Shelbyville protests. We were sitting around drinking whiskey, smoking cigars in a hotel lobby and taking pictures standing in front of a television as the CNN chyron breathlessly reported “Trump Bans More Than 134 Million People.” There was a meltdown going on at JFK Airport.

No, this executive order wasn’t as sweeping as I would have liked, but I am a realist. This issue was inevitably going to be fought and resolved in the federal courts. It makes sense to me to prod the Left into having a big meltdown now. The public will become accustomed to the outrage and once the sweeping principle is established that the president can unilaterally ban anyone traveling from a foreign country the policy can always be broadened later to encompass more countries.

Why do we need, say, Somalians? That’s a good place to start.

Hunter Wallace
the authorHunter Wallace
Hunter Wallace is the founder and editor of


  • Somalians like every other refugee have to prove “credible persecution”.

    Why then do these same ‘refugees’ take vacations in their countries of origin??? Picking up new skills perhaps?

  • And a Federal judge put a stop to it and Trump said he will abide by the ban. I was hoping to see a little more Andrew Jackson in him. Now everything he wants will have an injunction put on him by the Judiciary.

  • The literal gallons of liberal tears is priceless, I have to admit I thought Trump wouldn’t do much beside build a tall fence in the border and reduce refugees. But the now with total media/lefty freak out and hardening of their already vicious rhetoric will only serve to further embittered Trump.

  • At first I thought Trump’s ban on war ravaged Muslim countries was a cop out that didn’t go far enough. It would be very easy to convince Americans of the need to ban Saudis, since most of the 9-11 hijackers were Saudi.

    But Hunter’s analysis is correct. Leftists are revealing themselves for the traitorous scumbags they are with the protests and hand wringing over banning people from shitholes like Syria and Afghanistan. All Trump has to do it cite the European attacks by “refugees” from Syria to as a reason for enacting the ban.

    Trump is a counterpuncher. He proposes something like this Ban from certain countries, his opponents exhaust themselves quickly, then Trump knocks them the fuck out.

  • ah, the charitable folks above. wonder how many they personally allow to come into their own homes to eat, sleep, screw, procreate, and do zip? let me guess….their charity ends where the food and birth bills begin. thought so. they want us collectively to do what they will not do individually. hypo-fuckin’-crits! we seriously need to deport these weepy, sobby, neo-abolitionists or exile them to that little island in Oregon at Crater Lake

  • Progressive utopians apparently don’t understand their own propaganda. Literally Hitler has seized power in the United States, and yet the world’s refugees still want to come here?

    • We’re just trying to help the refugees by keeping them out AmeriKKKa the Islamophbic White Supremacist country. Who knows what Adolph Trumpler will do? Best if they go somewhere else.

      • Through a coalition government, yes Hitler was elected. Most Americans, and leftists in particular, are morons who do not understand the nuances of parliamentary government. So leftists say some historically inaccurate bullshit like “Hitler was elected by the majority!”

        • Weimar had a direct Presidential election, not a prime minister who was appointed by a victorious party.

          He ran for President and lost and was then appointed Chancellor by the victor Paul von Hindenburg, who was the incumbent and only person to have ever been elected President in Weimar. However Hindenburg’s party the DNVP were a conservative coalition who were sometimes allies of NSDAP and they were themselves urging the appointment of Hitler to the chancellorship.

          Hitler would have won a direct election without Hindenburg running specifically to prevent this from happening.

  • The precedent itself is a step in the right direction. Just asserting the right of the USA to exclude outsiders for any reason at all is an assertion of nationalist will.

    It would be nice if Trump also did this to a non-Muslim country, to break us out of this Israel-first, Jew-first, counter-jihad neo-con narrative, but that may be asking for too much at this point.

    Maybe that is what the alt-right should do now, start proposing other people we can ban. Forget the Muslims, why should, say, Ethiopians be allowed to come to the USA? Plus I’ve never particularly cared for Peruvians myself.

Leave a Reply