On Jan. 27, President Trump signed an executive order banning immigration indefinitely from Syria, and putting a 90 day suspension on immigration from Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Libya, Yemen and Somalia. With national security as the purpose behind the order, it aimed to protect the United States from “terror prone” nations. The order faced intense backlash from many, including groups based here in Seattle, because it targeted Muslim majority countries, and could be portrayed as discriminatory.

This backlash led to a court case argued by Washington’s Attorney General Bob Ferguson, and it was declared that there was not enough proof to declare refugees from these countries dangerous. This decision from  Federal Judge James Robart is valid nationwide, and overturns the ban indefinitely. It is not yet known if the Trump administration will take the case to the Supreme Court.

In the Roosevelt community, many were angry about the travel ban and rejoiced over the decision overturning the order. However, not all students opposed the ban. Freshman and Vice President of the RHS Republicans, Ben Payne, supported the ban because of the political message it sent to the countries it affected. Payne says, “All of the countries on the ban have state ties to terrorism.” Although there have not actually been any attacks on American soil by refugees from these countries, Payne sees the ban as a needed message to these governments.

On the other hand, liberal arguments reference the number of terror attacks by citizens of the countries affected in the ban on American soil: 0. Most Roosevelt students take this perspective, and look at the humanitarian issues with the ban more closely than the political message it may send. Countries like Saudi Arabia which have actually been the home of terrorists was not included in the ban, many students wonder why. The answer to this is probably because of the economic ties we have with Saudi Arabia, due to their oil reserves. The fact that we left them out of the ban reinforces the idea that this ban is not truly necessary for national security, which is the reason it was declared unconstitutional.

No matter what the opinions of the Roosevelt community at large are, America was divided over the immigration ban. It has likely been the most controversial executive order signed by President Trump so far, and even though it was overturned, we definitely haven’t seen the end of it.

Photo By: Rachel Black

One Comment

  1. Jonathan Weiser

    The problem with your article is you fail to present what is happening to European countries. Look at France, Belgium, Germany, and Sweden. Another thing you failed to mention is the deadly Ohio state attacker was a Somalian Refugee. These countries have state ties to terrorism and the message coming from you article is let the refugees in but you have to look at what it has done to Europe. Isis even said they were going to infiltrate the refugee program. I understand we don’t have any attacks on US soil because we have not been taking an uncontrollable amount of refugees. You need to explain in your article that rape in Sweden has gone up 20% in 2016. More countries will most likely be added to the ban. The reason we did not ban Saudi Arabia is due to the oil we buy from there which is necessary. We need to build the keystone so we can get oil from Canada. I am just asking that in the future you do not blindside facts. Just look at the news and you will see what is happening all around the world. I lived in France and I know what Islam has done to my country.

    Thank you,
    Jonathan Weiser

Leave a Reply