Students React to Executive Travel Ban

9 months ago Comments Off on Students React to Executive Travel Ban

President Trump issued the Immigration and Refugee Ban as an executive order on Jan. 27.

The act made significant temporary changes to refugee policy in the United States, restricting entry of refugees to 50,000 for the 2017 fiscal year, suspended the U. S. Refugee Admission Program (USRAP) for 120 days, blocking entries of foreign ‘aliens’ from Libya, Sudan, Somalia, Syria, Iran, Iraq, and Yemen for 90 days, and indefinitely suspended admitting any Syrian refugees. However, green card holders and dual citizens may continue to travel to the United States.

Global reactions to the order have been mixed.

This law has generated significant controversy, sparking protests all over the country, including numerous airports such as New York City’s John F. Kennedy International Airport and Houston’s George Bush Intercontinental Airport.

It has also been condemned by political leaders worldwide, including Chancellor of Germany’s Angela Merkel. Several legal suits, such as “Aziz v. Trump”, have challenged the executive order, claiming it violates The United States’ Constitution.

However, the act has received praise from Christian organizations, the alt-right, and many Republicans at large.

Along with many other voices of the country, Sam Houston State University students also have opinions on this recent executive order.

Political Science freshmen Paris Gentry said that he believes no one should be banned from arriving from a particular country.

“Well, I don’t necessarily agree that it’s okay for him to ban people,” said Gentry. “Especially because everyone comes here to get equal opportunities. I don’t think its his place to decide whether people should be allowed to come here. I just hope he gets better at making tough laws.”

David Salinas, Graphic Design freshmen, said the ban may lead to isolation for America.

“This ban is something unprecedented,” Salinas said. “Previous presidents did the same thing in a way, but not as extreme as Trump. As for his doing, it’s not unifying it; it’s not making America great again. It’s making America singular, it’s making it by itself, and it’s just not the right way to go about it. There are more people who want to make a future here than those who want to make terror here.”

Nursing freshman Rebecca Castaneda remained on the fence about Trump’s refugee policy, sympathizing with the cause of the immigrants, but also acknowledges the necessity of keeping the United States safe.

“I honestly don’t think that I would have done that,” Castaneda said. “But I understand where he is coming from. I mean, my parents are not from this country, so I understand the struggles of people trying to get out from another country. But we also need to protect our country, so I am not against him, but neither am I for him.”

According to Geography senior Brian Fox, a solution to the problem would be to have the ban be temporary.

“Right now, I think it’s the right decision for a 90 day refugee policy,” Fox said. “As far as multiple years go, I don’t think that is going to be the right decision. But three months is not going to really hurt. A lot of the liberal media are positing that ‘We’re a country of immigrants,’ and we are. But last time I checked, my Irish great-great grandparents weren’t bombing the U.S. I think 90 days is a stiff policy, but right now, I do support it.”