Trump's Travel Ban Returns
Awa B. | 17 June 2025
Summary
US President Donald Trump reinstated a travel ban on 19 mostly Muslim-majority and African countries, effective June 9.
The ban strains U.S. relations with key partners, particularly in Africa, and harms global reputation.
The combination of reduced U.S. foreign aid and restricted legal migration pathways will leave vulnerable populations with fewer safe alternatives, likely driving up irregular migration and exacerbating humanitarian crises.
President Donald Trump reinstated and expanded a travel ban that restricts entry into the United States (U.S.) from 19 countries took effect on 9 June 2025. This new measure echoes the controversial "Muslim ban" from his first term as it primarily affects Muslim-majority and African countries.
There is a full ban on entry for nationals from: Afghanistan, Myanmar (Burma), Chad, Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen. This results in non-immigrant and immigrant visas not being issued, which effectively blocks nearly all forms of entry. Partial restrictions apply to nationals from: Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela.This will target specific visa categories (tourist, student and work visas) while allowing others under strict vetting processes. Exemptions have been put in place for US lawful permanent residents, dual nationals using passports from non-restricted countries, diplomats, athletes attending major events, and holders of special immigrant visas, including Afghans who supported U.S. military efforts.
Trump justified the renewed restrictions by linking them to a recent attack in Boulder, Colorado, where an Egyptian national allegedly threw petrol bombs at a pro-Israel demonstration. Although Egypt is not among the restricted countries, Trump argued that the incident highlighted the dangers posed by foreign nationals who overstay visas and the need for stricter vetting processes.
The administration stated that the affected countries were selected based on factors such as inadequate identity-management protocols, insufficient information-sharing, and high visa overstay rates. This action showcases a renewed focus on strict immigration policies. In addition to the travel ban, the administration has taken steps to block foreign students from attending certain U.S. universities like Harvard. This was actioned by him signing an executive order to suspend the entry of foreign nations seeking to study or participate in programmes at Harvard and revoking their ability to enrol foreign students. Since its implementation, the policy has triggered a wave of legal challenges from civil right organisations, while protests have been reported in major U.S. cities. Robyn Barnard, Senior Director of Refugee Advocacy at Human Rights First, strongly criticised the action.
This renewed focus on exclusionary immigration policies follows a period of significant reductions in U.S. foreign aid, including deep cuts to United States Agency for International Development (USAID) programs and an attempt to shut down the agency entirely in February. Together, these actions signal a broader shift in U.S. engagement with the international world.
The ban disproportionately affects people from countries already navigating hardships due to war, authoritarian rule and resource extraction. These conditions can make it more difficult for citizens of these countries to access legal and safe migration pathways. While the policy is framed around security concerns, it may also limit the ability of individuals to escape persecution or hardship through legitimate channels such as student visas or humanitarian programs.
In addition to its humanitarian impact, this policy risks undermining the U.S.’s global reputation and straining international relations by alienating key partners. I. It signals a U.S. retreat from shared global initiatives, potentially weakening its role as a leader in multilateral efforts. The African Union, representing seven member states affected by the ban, urged the U.S. to implement such measures in a balanced, evidence-based manner that honours the longstanding U.S.-Africa partnership. The AU also expressed concern that the policy could have broader diplomatic and economic consequences beyond its immediate impact on individuals.
Within the US this ban may contribute to increased anxiety within affected diaspora communities in the US, especially among those with close family ties in restricted countries. These communities, many of whom maintain transnational ties with regions listed in the ban, will bear the brunt of separation, fear and disrupted futures.
The White House/CC BY 3.0 US
Forecast
Short-term (Now - 3 months)
Lawsuits from civil rights organisations and affected individuals are highly likely.
Nationwide protests, significant media attention, and renewed legal debates on the scope of executive power in immigration are likely to continue.
There is a realistic possibility that the communities from the affected areas will face increased discrimination and scrutiny.
Medium-term (3-12 months)
It is highly likely to see a negative impact on University enrolment
There is a high likelihood of diplomatic strain and reduced cooperation between the US and the African and Muslim-majority countries on the list. Heightened scrutiny of US immigration processes can be anticipated.
Long-term (>1 year)
There is a realistic possibility that the restrictions may affect sectors that are reliant on international immigration, such as higher education, tourism and global business, resulting in long-term revenue losses.
There is a realistic possibility that small businesses in immigrant communities may also experience economic disruptions tied to travel and remittances.
There is a realistic possibility of a damaged U.S global reputation.
