Donald Trump's chaotic Muslim-majority

immigration ban: the full story

 By Ruth Sherlock, WASHINGTON

It began with the simple stroke of a pen. Donald Trump was fresh from lunch with
Theresa May. Buoyant in his new role, the president kept the menu card to prove he had
eaten with the British Prime Minister.

Arriving at the Pentagon, Mr. Trump took the seat behind the executive desk, and at
4.42pm on Friday signed the document that was to prove the most explosive of his first
week in office. The executive order suspended entry of all refugees for 120 days and barred
those fleeing the slaughter in Syria indefinitely. And it blocked entry into the United
States for some three months for citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries.

The order, which the White House described as strict new measures to prevent terror
attacks on US soil, was to go into immediate effect.

The broad principle had been a key part of Mr Trump's successful election campaign.
Indeed, he had talked about instituting a ban on Muslim immigrants several times.

Yet it still appeared to catch the US establishment, the media and the wider world by
surprise. Last night it was claimed that, keen to make good on Mr Trump's campaign
promises on immigration, the White House had drafted the document in a hurry.

It was suggested that they failed to seriously consult the department of homeland security,
state department or the justice department, who would all be tasked with enacting the
order.

It was even claimed that the Trump administration had actually shielded the document
from a formal review by National Security Council lawyers. John Kelly, the homeland
security secretary, and other senior figures in the agency only saw the final details shortly
before it was issued, government officials told CNN.

A state department spokesperson declined to comment when the Daily Telegraph asked
if they had been properly briefed on the order, which landed on government desks on
Friday afternoon as employees prepared to leave for the weekend.

Informed government sources who asked not to be identified confirmed that the reports
were "absolutely true".

"It was chaos," one source said. "It's hard to know if this White House did this because
they don't understand how government works, or willful incompetence."
As refugees who had been mid-flight when the order was signed were being detained at
US airports, experts in government agencies were scrambling to understand the new
regulations.

On Friday night, the department of homeland security applied the restrictions to people
from seven countries - Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Sudan and Yemen, but said it did
not apply to those with lawful permanent residence in the US, known as green cards.

But the president's inner circle, including Steve Bannon, his chief strategist, reportedly
intervened overnight, and by Saturday the ruling had been extended to cover green card
holders too.

Confusion turned to panic as travelers were told they were unable to board flights to the
United States. Some passengers checked in but were then barred from boarding at the
gate.

Others were hauled off planes. Others arrived at American airports only to be detained
for hours. Some were refused access to legal assistance.

The order saw students at top American universities barred from entering the country.

Fuad Shareef, along with his wife and three children, was barred from boarding an Egypt
Air from Cairo to JFK International airport on Saturday morning.

Mr Shareef and his family hold valid entry visas and Special Immigration Visa 1-year
residency cards, granted due to his work as a translator for USAID in Iraq following the
2003 invasion.

Despite this, airline officials blocked the Kurdish family from travelling on to the United
States after they had flown from Erbil to Cairo. Along with a Yemeni citizen also affected
by the new ban they have been banned from leaving Cairo airport until they were due to
be flown back to their home country on Sunday.

"It's a very desperate situation for us. We have left schools, resigned from jobs and now
we have to go back to our home country and start all over again if this doesn't work out,"
said Bnyad, Mr Shareef's son.

Mr Trump's decision also dashed the hopes of desperate refugees who had believed they
had reached the final hurdle in the long resettlement process.

A Syrian family of six had been living in a Turkish refugee camp and were planning to fly
this week to the United States. But they were told their trip was cancelled.

“Everyone is just so heartbroken, so angry, so sad,” said Danielle Drake, the community
manager for US Together, an agency that resettles refugees.

Mr Trump invoked the September 11, 2001 attacks. But most of the 19 plane hijackers
were from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Lebanon – all countries
not included on the ban list.
Border patrol guards were forced to make on-the-spot decisions. When a lawyer asked
who to call to challenge the detention of two Iraqis, one of whom had worked with the US
military, a New York border official reportedly replied: "Mr Trump".

Lawyers and human rights groups immediately sued to block Mr Trump's order, arguing
that it both went against the spirit of the US constitution and the letter of American law.

Lawyers representing Khalid Darweesh and Haider Sameer Abdulkhaleq Alshawi, the two
Iraqi refugees held at John F Kennedy airport in New York, filed a writ of habeas
corpus early Saturday, asking a judge to order the release of the two men who had been
detained for hours, reportedly without access to a lawyer.

They also filed a motion to block the executive order on behalf of refugees and immigrants
who were arriving in the US with valid entry documents.

The orders also drew angry condemnation from the public, with demonstrations erupting
around the country.

Hundreds gathered at JFK and other airports to protest the decision and to welcome those
who had made it into the country despite the rulings. They filled the multi-storey carpark
outside the airport with cries of "No hate, no fear, refugees are welcome here".

At Dulles airport one protester held a homemade placard on which he had written
passages from the Statue of Liberty: "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled
masses."

A human rights organization put out a call for lawyers willing to help represent those
detained at airports and were inundated with thousands of calls.

By Saturday evening a federal judge had come to the aid of dozens - estimated to between
100 and 200 - trapped in US airports.

In a major blow to Mr Trump, Ann Donnelly, a judge from a district court in

Brooklyn issued a nationwide state of deportations, whilst government lawyers tried to
understand what was happening.

She blocked the government from deporting anyone who had arrived in the US with "valid
visas or refugee status".

But Ms Donelly stopped short of actually ordering these individuals to be allowed into the
country, prompting concerns that they might remain in detention whilst their cases were
considered.

Shortly afterwards, Leonie Brinkema from the federal court in Virginia issued a
temporary restraining order for a week to block the removal of any green card holders
being detained at Dulles International Airport.

Opponents of the executive orders accused the White House of implementing a "Muslim
ban". Mr Trump on Sunday defended the action.
But speaking on Fox News, Rudy Giuliani, the former mayor of New York and an ally of
Mr Trump showed further confusion, affirming that the president had in fact hoped to
implement a ban on people of the Muslim faith coming into the country.

"I’ll tell you the whole history of it: When he first announced it, he said ‘Muslim ban,” He
also said Mr Trump had called him up and asked him to "put a commission together" to
show him the right way to "do it legally".

Coming up against US religious discrimination laws, Mr Giuliani instead advised making

the ban about "danger" instead of religion.

Reince Priebus, the White House chief of staff, also left the green card issue open to
question, stating that the order did not apply to green card holders but they would be
subject to extra questioning.

John Kelly, US homeland security secretary issued a statement Sunday, saying he

deemed the entry of lawful permanent residents to be "in the national interest", and
absent information indicating a serious threat to public safety and welfare, residency
would be a "dispositive factor in our case-by-case determination."

The changes, said White House adviser Kellyanne Conway, are "a small price to pay" to
keep the nation safe.

The executive order draw sharp condemnation from foreign governments, including
Turkey, who has borne the brunt of the Syrian refugee crisis and Germany, who has so
far accepted more than one million citizens from the war torn country.

Mrs. May, who has been keen to develop Britain's relationship, at first avoided giving her
opinion on the ban, declaring it a matter for the US. But she eventually ordered her foreign
and home secretaries to take up the issue with their American counterparts when it
emerged that the order extended to dual citizens, including people with British passports.

Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary defended the order, denying that there had
been "chaos".

Analysts said the order was likely to harm Mr Trump, with the legal challenges likely to
make headlines for several weeks. And it has caused a split in Republican ranks.

His party could have helped codify the order by passing legislation in congress, but two
days later there was no move to do so. Most Democrats spoke out against the ban using
tough language.

And on Sunday Republicans began to do the same. John McCain, the Arizona senator
and former Republican presidential nominee, who is a leading voice in the party
condemned the action, as a move that would only help Isis in its propaganda.

"Ultimately, we fear this executive order will become a self-inflicted wound in the fight
against terrorism," he said.
Answer the following questions

1. What does “The US Establishment” mean?

2. What’s the main idea of this article?
3. Why did this measure take some US government officials by surprise?
4. How are US citizens, from the banned countries, affected?
5. According to Trump’s administration, why was this measure taken?
6. Which are some of the arguments given by his detractors and what actions are they taking?
7. What recommendations did one of Trump’s allies give him, prior to implementing the ban?
8. How can this decision pose a challenge for the US government in the upcoming months?
9. Identify 3 idiomatic expressions in the text
10. Write your opinion on this matter