President Trump anounced Wednesday that he would try stop Harvard University’s international students from entering the country, a move that will be felt for years to come. Mr. Trump, in the same proclamation, requested Secretary of State Marco Rubio to consider revoking current visas for Harvard students.

President Trump also signed a total travel ban on 12 countries, primarily in Africa and the Middle East, to prevent law abiding immigrants and visitors from entering the United States.

The ban, which goes into effect on Monday, bars travel to the United States by citizens of Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen.

In addition President Trump also signed a partial travel ban on an additional 7 countries. Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
 
A PROCLAMATION

During my first Administration, I restricted the entry of foreign nationals into the United States, which successfully prevented national security threats from reaching our borders and which the Supreme Court upheld.  In Executive Order 14161 of January 20, 2025 (Protecting the United States From Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats), I stated that it is the policy of the United States to protect its citizens from aliens who intend to commit terrorist attacks, threaten our national security, espouse hateful ideology, or otherwise exploit the immigration laws for malevolent purposes. 

I also stated that the United States must be vigilant during the visa-issuance process to ensure that those aliens approved for admission into the United States do not intend to harm Americans or our national interests.  More importantly, the United States must identify such aliens before their admission or entry into the United States.  The United States must ensure that admitted aliens and aliens otherwise already present in the United States do not bear hostile attitudes toward its citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles, and do not advocate for, aid, or support designated foreign terrorists or other threats to our national security.

I directed the Secretary of State, in coordination with the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence, to identify countries throughout the world for which vetting and screening information is so deficient as to warrant a full or partial suspension on the admission of nationals from those countries pursuant to section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1182(f).  After completing that process, the Secretary of State determined that a number of countries remain deficient with regards to screening and vetting.  Many of these countries have also taken advantage of the United States in their exploitation of our visa system and their historic failure to accept back their removable nationals. 

As President, I must act to protect the national security and national interest of the United States and its people.  I remain committed to engaging with those countries willing to cooperate to improve information-sharing and identity-management procedures, and to address both terrorism-related and public-safety risks.  Nationals of some countries also pose significant risks of overstaying their visas in the United States, which increases burdens on immigration and law enforcement components of the United States, and often exacerbates other risks related to national security and public safety.

Some of the countries with inadequacies face significant challenges to reform efforts.  Others have made important improvements to their protocols and procedures, and I commend them for these efforts.  But until countries with identified inadequacies address them, members of my Cabinet have recommended certain conditional restrictions and limitations.  I have considered and largely accepted those recommendations and impose the limitations set forth below on the entry into the United States by the classes of foreign nationals identified in sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, by the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including sections 212(f) and 215(a) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f) and 1185(a), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, hereby find that, absent the measures set forth in this proclamation, the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of persons described in sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and that their entry should be subject to certain restrictions, limitations, and exceptions.  I therefore hereby proclaim the following:

Section 1.  Policy and Purpose.  (a)  It is the policy of the United States to protect its citizens from terrorist attacks and other national security or public-safety threats.  Screening and vetting protocols and procedures associated with visa adjudications and other immigration processes play a critical role in implementing that policy.  These protocols enhance our ability to detect foreign nationals who may commit, aid, or support acts of terrorism, or otherwise pose a safety threat, and they aid our efforts to prevent such individuals from entering the United States.

(b)  Information-sharing and identity-management protocols and practices of foreign governments are important for the effectiveness of the screening and vetting protocols and procedures of the United States.  Governments manage the identity and travel documents of their nationals and residents. They also control the circumstances under which they provide information about their nationals to other governments, including information about known or suspected terrorists and criminal-history information.  It is, therefore, the policy of the United States to take all necessary and appropriate steps to encourage foreign governments to improve their information-sharing and identity-management protocols and practices and to regularly share their identity and threat information with the immigration screening and vetting systems of the United States.

(c)  Section 2(b) of Executive Order 14161 directed the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence, within 60 days of the date of that order, to jointly submit to the President, through the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security, a report identifying countries throughout the world for which vetting and screening information is so deficient as to warrant a full or partial suspension on the entry or admission of nationals from those countries pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1182(f)).

(d)  On April 9, 2025, the Secretary of State, with the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security, presented the report described in subsection (c) of this section, recommending that entry restrictions and limitations be placed on foreign nationals of several countries.  The report identified countries for which vetting and screening information is so deficient as to warrant a full suspension of admissions and countries that warrant a partial suspension of admission.

(e)  In evaluating the recommendations from the Secretary of State and in determining what restrictions to impose for each country, I consulted with the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, appropriate Assistants to the President, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.  I considered foreign policy, national security, and counterterrorism goals.  And I further considered various factors, including each country’s screening and vetting capabilities, information sharing policies, and country-specific risk factors — including whether each country has a significant terrorist presence within its territory, its visa-overstay rate, and its cooperation with accepting back its removable nationals. 

I also considered the different risks posed by aliens admitted on immigrant visas and those admitted on nonimmigrant visas.  Persons admitted on immigrant visas become lawful permanent residents of the United States.  Such persons may present national security or public-safety concerns that may be distinct from those admitted as nonimmigrants.  The United States affords lawful permanent residents more enduring rights than it does to nonimmigrants.  Lawful permanent residents are more difficult to remove than nonimmigrants, even after national security concerns arise, which increases the costs and aggravates the dangers of errors associated with admitting such individuals.  And although immigrants are generally subject to more extensive vetting than nonimmigrants, such vetting is far less reliable when the country from which someone seeks to emigrate maintains inadequate identity-management or information-sharing policies or otherwise poses risks to the national security of the United States.

I reviewed these factors and assessed these goals, with a particular focus on crafting country-specific restrictions.  This approach was designed to encourage cooperation with the subject countries in recognition of each country’s unique circumstances.  The restrictions and limitations imposed by this proclamation are, in my judgment, necessary to prevent the entry or admission of foreign nationals about whom the United States Government lacks sufficient information to assess the risks they pose to the United States.  The restrictions and limitations imposed by this proclamation are necessary to garner cooperation from foreign governments, enforce our immigration laws, and advance other important foreign policy, national security, and counterterrorism objectives.

(f)  After reviewing the report described in subsection (d) of this section, and after accounting for the foreign policy, national security, and counterterrorism objectives of the United States, I have determined to fully restrict and limit the entry of nationals of the following 12 countries:  Afghanistan, Burma, Chad, Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen.  These restrictions distinguish between, but apply to both, the entry of immigrants and nonimmigrants.

(g)  I have determined to partially restrict and limit the entry of nationals of the following 7 countries:  Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela.  These restrictions distinguish between, but apply to both, the entry of immigrants and nonimmigrants. 

(h)  Sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation describe some of the identity-management or information-sharing inadequacies that led me to impose restrictions.  These inadequacies are sufficient to justify my finding that unrestricted entry of nationals from the named countries would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.  Publicly disclosing additional details on which I relied in making these determinations, however, would cause serious damage to the national security of the United States, and many such details are classified.

Sec. 2.  Full Suspension of Entry for Nationals of Countries of Identified Concern.  The entry into the United States of nationals of the following countries is hereby suspended and limited, as follows, subject to the categorical exceptions and case-by-case waivers described in section 5 of this proclamation:

(a)  Afghanistan

(i)   The Taliban, a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) group, controls Afghanistan.  Afghanistan lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.  According to the Fiscal Year 2023 Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Entry/Exit Overstay Report (“Overstay Report”), Afghanistan had a business/tourist (B-1/B-2) visa overstay rate of 9.70 percent and a student (F), vocational (M), and exchange visitor (J) visa overstay rate of 29.30 percent.

(ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Afghanistan as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.

(b)  Burma

(i)   According to the Overstay Report, Burma had a B‑1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 27.07 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 42.17 percent.  Additionally, Burma has historically not cooperated with the United States to accept back their removable nationals.

(ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Burma as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.

(c)  Chad

(i)   According to the Overstay Report, Chad had a B‑1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 49.54 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 55.64 percent.  According to the Fiscal Year 2022 Overstay Report, Chad had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 37.12 percent.  The high visa overstay rate for 2022 and 2023 is unacceptable and indicates a blatant disregard for United States immigration laws.  

(ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Chad as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.

(d)  Republic of the Congo

(i)   According to the Overstay Report, the Republic of the Congo had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 29.63 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 35.14 percent.

(ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of the Republic of the Congo as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.

(e)  Equatorial Guinea

(i)   According to the Overstay Report, Equatorial Guinea had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 21.98 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 70.18 percent.

(ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Equatorial Guinea as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.

(f)  Eritrea

(i)   The United States questions the competence of the central authority for issuance of passports or civil documents in Eritrea.  Criminal records are not available to the United States for Eritrean nationals.  Eritrea has historically refused to accept back its removable nationals.  According to the Overstay Report, Eritrea had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 20.09 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 55.43 percent.

(ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Eritrea as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.

(g)  Haiti

(i)   According to the Overstay Report, Haiti had a B‑1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 31.38 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 25.05 percent.  Additionally, hundreds of thousands of illegal Haitian aliens flooded into the United States during the Biden Administration.  This influx harms American communities by creating acute risks of increased overstay rates, establishment of criminal networks, and other national security threats.  As is widely known, Haiti lacks a central authority with sufficient availability and dissemination of law enforcement information necessary to ensure its nationals do not undermine the national security of the United States. 

(ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Haiti as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.

(h)  Iran

(i)   Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism.  Iran regularly fails to cooperate with the United States Government in identifying security risks, is the source of significant terrorism around the world, and has historically failed to accept back its removable nationals. 

(ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Iran as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby suspended.

(i)  Libya

(i)   There is no competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents in Libya.  The historical terrorist presence within Libya’s territory amplifies the risks posed by the entry into the United States of its nationals.

(ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Libya as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.

(j)  Somalia

(i)   Somalia lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.  Somalia stands apart from other countries in the degree to which its government lacks command and control of its territory, which greatly limits the effectiveness of its national capabilities in a variety of respects.  A persistent terrorist threat also emanates from Somalia’s territory.  The United States Government has identified Somalia as a terrorist safe haven.  Terrorists use regions of Somalia as safe havens from which they plan, facilitate, and conduct their operations.  Somalia also remains a destination for individuals attempting to join terrorist groups that threaten the national security of the United States.  The Government of Somalia struggles to provide governance needed to limit terrorists’ freedom of movement.  Additionally, Somalia has historically refused to accept back its removable nationals.

(ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Somalia as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.

(k)  Sudan

(i)   Sudan lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.  According to the Overstay Report, Sudan had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 26.30 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 28.40 percent. 

(ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Sudan as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.

(l)  Yemen

(i)   Yemen lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.  The government does not have physical control over its own territory.  Since January 20, 2025, Yemen has been the site of active United States military operations.

(ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Yemen as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.

Sec. 3.  Partial Suspension of Entry for Nationals of Countries of Identified Concern.

(a)  Burundi

(i)    According to the Overstay Report, Burundi had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 15.35 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 17.52 percent. 

(ii)   The entry into the United States of nationals of Burundi as immigrants, and as nonimmigrants on B-1, B-2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas, is hereby suspended.

(iii)  Consular officers shall reduce the validity for any other nonimmigrant visa issued to nationals of Burundi to the extent permitted by law.

(b)  Cuba

(i)    Cuba is a state sponsor of terrorism.  The Government of Cuba does not cooperate or share sufficient law enforcement information with the United States.  Cuba has historically refused to accept back its removable nationals.  According to the Overstay Report, Cuba had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 7.69 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 18.75 percent.

(ii)   The entry into the United States of nationals of Cuba as immigrants, and as nonimmigrants on B-1, B‑2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas, is hereby suspended.

(iii)  Consular officers shall reduce the validity for any other nonimmigrant visa issued to nationals of Cuba to the extent permitted by law.

(c)  Laos

(i)    According to the Overstay Report, Laos had a B‑1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 34.77 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 6.49 percent.  Laos has historically failed to accept back its removable nationals. 

(ii)   The entry into the United States of nationals of Laos as immigrants, and as nonimmigrants on B-1, B‑2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas, is hereby suspended.

(iii)  Consular officers shall reduce the validity for any other nonimmigrant visa issued to nationals of Laos to the extent permitted by law.

(d)  Sierra Leone

(i)    According to the Overstay Report, Sierra Leone had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 15.43 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 35.83 percent.  Sierra Leone has historically failed to accept back its removable nationals. 

(ii)   The entry into the United States of nationals of Sierra Leone as immigrants, and as nonimmigrants on B-1, B-2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas is hereby suspended.

(iii)  Consular officers shall reduce the validity for any other nonimmigrant visa issued to nationals of Sierra Leone to the extent permitted by law.

(e)  Togo

(i)    According to the Overstay Report, Togo had a B‑1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 19.03 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 35.05 percent. 

(ii)   The entry into the United States of nationals of Togo as immigrants, and as nonimmigrants on B-1, B‑2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas is hereby suspended.

(iii)  Consular officers shall reduce the validity for any other nonimmigrant visa issued to nationals of Togo to the extent permitted by law.

(f)  Turkmenistan

(i)   According to the Overstay Report, Turkmenistan had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 15.35 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 21.74 percent. 

(ii)   The entry into the United States of nationals of Turkmenistan as immigrants, and as nonimmigrants on B-1, B-2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas is hereby suspended.

(iii)  Consular officers shall reduce the validity for any other nonimmigrant visa issued to nationals of Turkmenistan to the extent permitted by law.

(g)  Venezuela

(i)    Venezuela lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.  Venezuela has historically refused to accept back its removable nationals.  According to the Overstay Report, Venezuela had a B‑1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 9.83 percent.

(ii)   The entry into the United States of nationals of Venezuela as immigrants, and as nonimmigrants on B‑1, B-2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas is hereby suspended.

(iii)  Consular officers shall reduce the validity for any other nonimmigrant visa issued to nationals of Venezuela to the extent permitted by law.

Sec. 4.  Scope and Implementation of Suspensions and Limitations.  (a)  Scope.  Subject to the exceptions set forth in subsection (b) of this section and any exceptions made pursuant to subsections (c) and (d) of this section, the suspensions of and limitations on entry pursuant to sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation shall apply only to foreign nationals of the designated countries who:

(i)   are outside the United States on the applicable effective date of this proclamation; and

(ii)  do not have a valid visa on the applicable effective date of this proclamation.

(b)  Exceptions.  The suspension of and limitation on entry pursuant to sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation shall not apply to:

(i)     any lawful permanent resident of the United States;

(ii)    any dual national of a country designated under sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation when the individual is traveling on a passport issued by a country not so designated;

(iii)   any foreign national traveling with a valid nonimmigrant visa in the following classifications:  A-1, A-2, C-2, C-3, G-1, G-2, G-3, G-4, NATO-1, NATO‑2, NATO-3, NATO-4, NATO-5, or NATO-6;

(iv)    any athlete or member of an athletic team, including coaches, persons performing a necessary support role, and immediate relatives, traveling for the World Cup, Olympics, or other major sporting event as determined by the Secretary of State;

(v)     immediate family immigrant visas (IR-1/CR-1, IR-2/CR-2, IR-5) with clear and convincing evidence of identity and family relationship (e.g., DNA);

(vi)    adoptions (IR-3, IR-4, IH-3, IH-4);

(vii)   Afghan Special Immigrant Visas;

(viii)  Special Immigrant Visas for United States Government employees; and

(ix)    immigrant visas for ethnic and religious minorities facing persecution in Iran.

(c)  Exceptions to the suspension of and limitation on entry pursuant to sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation may be made for certain individuals for whom the Attorney General finds, in her discretion, that the travel by the individual would advance a critical United States national interest involving the Department of Justice, including when individuals must be present to participate in criminal proceedings as witnesses.  These exceptions shall be made only by the Attorney General, or her designee, in coordination with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security.

(d)  Exceptions to the suspension of and limitation on entry pursuant to sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation may be made case-by-case for individuals for whom the Secretary of State finds, in his discretion, that the travel by the individual would serve a United States national interest.  These exceptions shall be made by only the Secretary of State or his designee, in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security or her designee.

Sec. 5.  Adjustments to and Removal of Suspensions and Limitations.  (a)  The Secretary of State shall, in consultation with the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director for National Intelligence, devise a process to assess whether any suspensions and limitations imposed by sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation should be continued, terminated, modified, or supplemented.  Within 90 days of the date of this proclamation, and every 180 days thereafter, the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence, shall submit a report to the President, through the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security, describing his assessment and recommending whether any suspensions and limitations imposed by sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation should be continued, terminated, modified, or supplemented.

(b)  The Secretary of State, in consultation with the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence, shall immediately engage each of the countries identified in sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation on measures that must be taken to comply with United States screening, vetting, immigration, and security requirements.

(c)  Additionally, and in light of recent events, the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence, shall provide me an update to the review of the practices and procedures of Egypt to confirm the adequacy of its current screening and vetting capabilities.

Sec. 6.  Enforcement.  (a)  The Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall consult with appropriate domestic and international partners, including countries and organizations, to ensure efficient, effective, and appropriate implementation of this proclamation.

(b)  In implementing this proclamation, the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall comply with all applicable laws and regulations.

(c)  No immigrant or nonimmigrant visa issued before the applicable effective date of this proclamation shall be revoked pursuant to this proclamation.

(d)  This proclamation shall not apply to an individual who has been granted asylum by the United States, to a refugee who has already been admitted to the United States, or to an individual granted withholding of removal or protection under the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment of Punishment (CAT).  Nothing in this proclamation shall be construed to limit the ability of an individual to seek asylum, refugee status, withholding of removal, or protection under the CAT, consistent with the laws of the United States.

Sec. 7.  Severability.  It is the policy of the United States to enforce this proclamation to the maximum extent possible to advance the national security, foreign policy, and counterterrorism interests of the United States.  Accordingly:

(a)  if any provision of this proclamation, or the application of any provision of this proclamation to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid, the remainder of this proclamation and the application of its other provisions to any other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby; and

(b)  if any provision of this proclamation, or the application of any provision of this proclamation to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid because of the lack of certain procedural requirements, the relevant executive branch officials shall implement those procedural requirements to conform with existing law and with any applicable court orders.

Sec. 8.  Effective Date.  This proclamation is effective at 12:01 am eastern daylight time on June 9, 2025.

Sec. 9.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this proclamation shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b)  This proclamation shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c)  This proclamation is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable by law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this fourth day of June, in the year of our Lord two thousand twenty‑five, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-ninth.

                             DONALD J. TRUMP

On May 27, 2025, Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a directive instructing U.S. consular posts worldwide to cease scheduling appointments for F, M, and J visa categories, ostensibly to implement new social media vetting protocols (adding yet another good reason to delete your Twitter (X) and Facebook accounts).  

This unprecedented move affects an ecosystem that generated $43.8 billion through tuition, housing, and living expenses in the 2023-2024 academic year alone. The decision comes amid an escalating confrontation between the administration and elite universities, with Harvard University bearing the brunt of federal retaliation.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has terminated Harvard's Student and Exchange Visitor Program certification, effectively barring the institution from enrolling foreign students for the 2025-2026 academic year. Yes, the same Kristi Noem that shot her dog in the head when it would not obey her commands. https://www.humaneworld.org/en/blog/kristi-noem-puppy-killing-scandal

It is unclear at this time if these bans will impact Legal Permanent Residents (Green Card Holders). 

This list is not final, but is likely to be implemented in some form in the very near future with almost immediate effect. 

ALL TRAVEL BANNED

Afghanistan

Bhutan

Cuba

Iran

Libya

North Korea

Somalia

Sudan

Syria

Venezuela

Yemen

MAY BE BANNED

Belarus

Eritrea

Haiti

Laos

Myanmar

Pakistan

Russia

Sierra Leone

South Sudan

Turkmenistan

MAY BE BANNED IN 60 DAYS

Angola

Antigua and Barbuda

Benin

Burkina Faso

Cambodia

Cameroon

Cape Verde

Chad

Republic of Congo

Democratic Republic of Congo

Dominica

Equatorial Guinea

Gambia

Liberia

Malawi

Mali

Mauritania

St. Kitts and Nevis

St. Lucia

São Tomé and Príncipe

Vanuatu

Zimbabwe

Possible Travel Ban:

Although we do not know for sure, we encourage immigrants in the United States who are citizens of:

Afghanistan,

Iraq,

Iran,

Libya,

Palestine/Gaza,

Pakistan,

Somalia,

Sudan,

Syria, and

Yemen 

to avoid international travel at this time, and return back to the US if temporarily outside the US. This can help ensure that you are not trapped overseas and banned from the United States if a ban comes into effect before your return trip.

On February 25, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services announced that the Trump administration will reanimate a provision of U.S. immigration law that has essentially been dormant for decades: a requirement for all aliens register with the federal government after their arrival AND carry proof of their registration with them at all times. This includes even Legal Permanent Resident Green Card holders.

The administration has ordered Federal Prosecutors to prioritize prosecuting anyone that has failed to register OR that fails to carry proof of registration at all times. 

Background...

One of the executive orders signed on the first day of the current Trump administration highlighted the registration requirement, instructing the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (along with the State Department and Department of Justice) to “ensure that all previously unregistered aliens comply” with the registration law, and to ensure that failure to comply with the registration requirement is treated as a “civil and criminal enforcement priority.” A memo sent to federal prosecutors on January 21, instructing them to prioritize criminal prosecutions for immigration-related offenses, listed the criminal registration law (sections 1304 and 1306) among those that should be prosecuted when discovered. However, in order to successfully prosecute people for failing to register, the government needed to provide a way for them to register to begin with. 

The February 25 announcement from USCIS makes it clear that process will be forthcoming. It encourages everyone who has not already been deemed registered to create a USCIS online account, which can then be used to submit the registration form when such a form is ultimately published. 

Once there is a way to register, federal prosecutors will be able to criminally charge people for the crime of failing to register or failing to carry evidence of registration with them. This will allow them to prosecute unauthorized immigrants who previously could not be criminally prosecuted. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents may also be deputized as criminal law enforcement officers for this purpose, permitting them to arrest people on both civil immigration charges and criminal law violations. 

Federal regulations include a list of forms which are considered sufficient for registration. 

According to the USCIS announcement, anyone who has been issued one of the following documents and who has been fingerprinted by the federal government is considered “registered” under the law and will not need to submit new registration through the forthcoming process. However, they may need to carry proof of their documentation with them if they want to avoid criminal charges. 

• I-94 (Arrival-Departure Record) which covers:
  • People admitted with non-immigrant visas. 
  • People paroled into the U.S. under 212(d)(5) of INA. 
  • People who have been granted permission to depart without the institution of deportation proceedings.
• I-95, Crewmen's Landing Permit—Crewmen arriving by vessel or aircraft.  
• I-184, Alien Crewman Landing Permit and Identification Card—Crewmen arriving by vessel.   
• I-185, Nonresident Alien Canadian Border Crossing Card—Citizens of Canada or British subjects residing in Canada.   
• I-186, Nonresident Alien Mexican Border Crossing Card—Citizens of Mexico residing in Mexico.   
• I-221, Order to Show Cause and Notice of Hearing—People against whom deportation proceedings are being instituted.   
• I-221S, Order to Show Cause, Notice of Hearing, and Warrant for Arrest of Alien—People against whom deportation proceedings are being instituted.   
• I-551, Permanent Resident Card—Lawful permanent residents of the United States.   
• I-766, Employment Authorization Document—People with work permits. 
• I-862, Notice to Appear—People against whom removal proceedings are being instituted.   
• I-863, Notice of Referral to Immigration Judge—People against whom removal proceedings are being instituted. 

Many immigrants who do not have full legal status in the United States nevertheless have one or more of these documents and are thus considered registered. For example, most of the 3.7 million immigrants who are currently in deportation proceedings before an immigration judge have been issued one of the documents above. Similarly, many immigrants have work permits, including many people with Temporary Protected Status or Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals and many asylum applicants. People who have been paroled into the United States are considered registered even if the period of their parole has expired. 

Immigrants who do not have any of these documents may be considered unregistered. This includes people who entered without inspection and have had no subsequent contact with the federal government because they have previously been unable to seek legal status or even to register a—population that may number in the millions. It also includes people who have applied for some benefits, such as TPS or DACA, but who have not been fingerprinted and whose applications have not been approved. 

The new registration policy forces "unregistered” immigrants to choose between two risky options. Choosing to submit the designated form to the federal government, once it is available, may put them at risk of being placed in removal proceedings. Choosing not to submit it may put them at risk of future criminal prosecution for failing to register if they are apprehended by ICE at a later point. 

Additionally, it raises the possibility that immigrants who are already registered—including those with legal status—may be arrested and prosecuted for failing to carry proof of their registration with them at all times or failing to provide it to law enforcement when asked. 

Immigrant communities around the United States are already living in fear of the Trump administration’s scaled-up immigration enforcement efforts. News of the registration requirement is likely to exacerbate the fear and anxiety in these communities.  

Anxiety, especially when stoked by rumors and misinformation, can strike people who are not in fact targeted by a policy; it can also terrorize people (whether targeted or not) to the point of harm for themselves and their families. During the first Trump administration, for example, early reports of a regulation restricting access to legal immigration status for use of certain government benefits (the “public charge” regulation) led to noticeable and persistent declines in the use of public benefits including food stamps and Head Start— including benefits that were not ultimately restricted by the regulation, and persisting after the Biden administration rescinded the regulation.  

The American Immigration Council is working to ensure that our communications about this issue give people relevant information to make decisions and avoid terrorizing people who are already very afraid to go about their lives. 

Know Your Basics Rights with ICE:

You have the right to remain silent. You do NOT have to speak to ICE or answer questions. You should state clearly that you have the right to remain silent, and are choosing to do so.

If you are approached by an ICE officer, you can ask if you can leave, and if they say no you can say to them that you choose to remain silent.

You do NOT have to show an ICE officer identity documents that say you are from another country. (Do NOT show false documents or lie to an officer).

If you are detained by an ICE officer, you can say that you want to speak to a lawyer. One will not be provided to you, but if you do not have an attorney you can ask for a free attorney list to call. You also have the right to ask to contact your Embassy who can provide information about free attorneys. State as clearly as possible, “I want a lawyer.”

If an ICE officer comes to your home you do NOT have to open the door unless they have a proper warrant signed by a Judge. If they claim they have a warrant you can ask them to slide it under the door or put it up to the glass for you to review. If it is an immigration warrant, titled “Warrant of Removal/Deportation,” it does NOT give the officer the right to enter your home (you can ask them to leave).

A search or arrest warrant does give an officer legal permission to enter your home, however, it still has to meet certain requirements to be valid. It MUST be signed by a Judge and have your CORRECT name on it.

The warrant may be signed by someone who is not a judge. Their title will be listed near the signature, and it MUST say Judge. If the warrant lists someone who does not live at the home you can tell that to ICE and you do NOT need to open the door. If there are others living in your home, even children, make sure they understand this.

If you are detained by ICE, you do NOT have to sign any documents they present to you. You can ask for a lawyer before signing any documents.

*** Certain Lebanese nationals will be eligible for DED and TPS, allowing them to work and temporarily remain in the United States ***

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is announcing new actions to provide temporary immigration reprieve to eligible Lebanese nationals currently in the United States and allowing them the opportunity to request work authorization. Included in today’s announcement are details related to the Deferred Enforced Departure (DED) for Lebanese nationals as previously announced in July, and a planned new Temporary Protected Status (TPS) designation for Lebanon.

Secretary Mayorkas is announcing a new TPS designation for Lebanon for 18 months due to ongoing armed conflict and extraordinary and temporary conditions in Lebanon that prevent nationals of Lebanon from returning in safety. Those approved for TPS will be able to remain in the country while the United States is in discussions to achieve a diplomatic resolution for lasting stability and security across the Israel-Lebanon border.

The designation of Lebanon for TPS will allow Lebanese nationals (and individuals having no nationality who last habitually resided in Lebanon) who have been continuously residing in the United States since October 16, 2024 to file initial applications for TPS, if they are otherwise eligible. Lebanese nationals who entered the United States after October 16, 2024 will not be eligible for TPS. 

More information about TPS, including how to apply for employment authorization, will be included in a forthcoming Federal Register Notice which DHS intends to publish in the next few weeks. Individuals should not apply for TPS under this designation until this Federal Register Notice publishes.

DHS is also publishing a Special Student Relief Notice for F-1 nonimmigrant students whose country of citizenship is Lebanon, or individuals having no nationality who last habitually resided in Lebanon, so that eligible students may request employment authorization, work an increased number of hours while school is in session, and reduce their course load while continuing to maintain F-1 status through the DED designation period.

In total, approximately 11,000 Lebanese nationals will likely be eligible for DED and TPS pursuant to these actions. There are also approximately 1,740 F-1 nonimmigrant students from Lebanon in the United States who may be eligible for Special Student Relief.

President Biden is set to announce a new program for Parole in Place for Spouse's of US citizen that have been physically in the US for more than ten [10] years, but that are unable to currently Adjust their Status to Legal Permanent Resident because they entered the US without inspection (EWI). 

In a program scheduled to be live later this Summer, applicants will be able to apply for this Parole in Place without leaving the US, which will give them a lawful entry and allow them to obtain their Green Card based upon their marriage with a US citizen spouse where they can prove they've physically been in the US for at least ten [10] years. The marriage with the US citizen must have taken place PRIOR to June 17, 2024. Marriages that take place after this date will not be considered under this Parole in Place program based on what we know today.

Under President Obama, this issue had previously been addressed through the I-601(a) Provisional Waiver for Unlawful Presence, which is still available to this day. However this process was hard to obtain, and took years to process. With the new Biden Parole in Place application applicants that have been in the US for at least ten [10] years will be able to directly obtain their Green Card without the need of a I-601(a) waiver. 

More details are set to become availbale on this program over the course of the summer.  

Fact Sheet: DHS Announces New Process to Promote the Unity and Stability of Families

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced actions to promote family unity in the immigration process, consistent with the Biden-Harris Administration’s commitment to keeping families together. This announcement utilizes existing authorities to promote family unity, but only Congress can fix our broken immigration system.

Under current law, noncitizens married to a U.S. citizen may apply for lawful permanent residence through their marriage to a U.S. citizen. However, to apply for lawful permanent residence, many noncitizens must first depart the United States and wait to be processed abroad, resulting in a prolonged, potentially indefinite, period of separation from their U.S. citizen family members and causing tremendous hardship to all concerned. Consequently, these families live in fear and face deep uncertainty about their future.

To address this challenge, DHS will establish a new process to consider, on a case-by-case basis, requests for certain noncitizen spouses of U.S. citizens who have lived in the United States for 10 years or more; do not pose a threat to public safety or national security; are otherwise eligible to apply for adjustment of status; and merit a favorable exercise of discretion. If eligible, these noncitizens will be able to apply for lawful permanent residence without having to leave the United States. DHS estimates that approximately 500,000 noncitizen spouses of U.S. citizens could be eligible to access this process; on average, these noncitizens have resided in the United States for 23 years. Approximately 50,000 children of these spouses also will be eligible for this process. Noncitizens who pose a threat to national security or public safety will not be eligible for this process, as aligned with our immigration enforcement priorities. If a noncitizen poses a threat to national security or public safety, DHS will detain, remove, or refer them to other federal agencies for further vetting, investigation, or prosecution as appropriate.

Today’s actions build on unprecedented steps by the Biden-Harris Administration to strengthen family unity including by implementing family reunification parole processes for nationals of Colombia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Ecuador; updating and modernizing the Cuban and Haitian family reunification parole processes; leading the Family Reunification Task Force to reunify nearly 800 children with their families who were separated; and establishing country-specific parole processes for certain nationals of Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela (CHNV) who have a U.S.-based supporter.

Eligibility and Process

To be considered on a case-by-case basis for this process, an individual must:

• Be present in the United States without admission or parole;
• Have been continuously present in the United States for at least 10 years as of June 17, 2024; and
• Have a legally valid marriage to a U.S. citizen as of June 17, 2024.

In addition, individuals must have no disqualifying criminal history or otherwise constitute a threat to national security or public safety and should otherwise merit a favorable exercise of discretion.

Noncitizen children of potential requestors may also be considered for parole under this process if they are physically present in the United States without admission or parole and have a qualifying stepchild relationship to a U.S. citizen as of June 17, 2024.

In order to be considered for parole, an individual will need to file a form with USCIS along with supporting documentation to show they meet the requirements and pay a fee. Further information regarding eligibility and the application process, including a notice in the Federal Register, will be published in the near term. USCIS will reject any filings or individual requests received before the date when the application period begins later this summer.

Upon receipt of a properly filed parole in place request USCIS will determine on a case-by-case basis whether a grant of parole is warranted and whether the applicant merits a favorable exercise of discretion. All requests will take into consideration the potential requestor’s previous immigration history, criminal history, the results of background checks and national security and public safety vetting, and any other relevant information available to or requested by USCIS. USCIS has strong processes in place to identify and address potential fraud, which will be applied here to ensure the integrity of this program.

Other Action

In addition, DHS will join the Department of State in an effort to more efficiently facilitate certain employment-based nonimmigrant visas for eligible individuals, including Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients and undocumented noncitizens, who have graduated from an accredited U.S. institution of higher education. By clarifying and enhancing the existing process, the Department of State’s policy will give U.S. employers increased confidence that they can hire the talent they need, and that they will be able to quickly get to work. DHS will implement the Department of State’s policy update.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) published a final rule to adjust certain immigration and naturalization benefit request fees for the first time since 2016. Ironically the new fees will be required starting on April Fool's Day 4/1/2024. 

It looks at first glance for Family Based Cases and Naturalization Cases that the new fees very similar to the old fees, without much increase. The largest difference will be for K-1 Visa clients who will expect to pay about $355 more than before from end to end with government fees including the Adjustment of Status proces at the end.

The smallest change is to Naturalization, which is only up by $35, but is actually less than before as it appears the new fee incorporates the biometrics fees that previously were charged separately.

At a Glance:

I-130 will move from $535 to be $675

I-129(f) will move from $535 to be $675

I-485 will move from $1,225 to be $1,440

N-400 will move from $725 to be $760

In Detail, the "FINAL FEE(s)" is the new amount that will be used as of April 1, 2024.

For immigration purposes, it is federal law that controls, and it remains a federal offense to possess marijuana. In particular, a noncitizen who admits to an immigration official that they possessed marijuana can be found inadmissible, denied entry into the United States, or have their application for lawful status or naturalization denied. Depending on the circumstances, it can make a lawful permanent resident deportable.

This is true even if the conduct was permitted under state law, the person never was convicted of a crime, and the conduct took place in their own home. State laws legalizing marijuana provide many benefits, but unfortunately, they also are a trap for unwary immigrants. Believing that they have done nothing wrong, immigrants may readily admit to officials that they possessed marijuana.

In some states, such as Washington, ICE, CIS, and/or CBP agents have aggressively asked noncitizens if they ever have possessed marijuana, in an attempt to find people inadmissible. In other states, such as California, CIS does not appear to be doing this, although CBP officials at border and internal checkpoints are.

State laws, like the laws in Ohio, that legalize marijuana fall into two categories. State medical marijuana laws typically require the person to have a doctor’s order. They permit buying, owning, using, and often growing a small amount of marijuana, but do not permit giving away, selling (without a license), or other conduct. State recreational marijuana laws don’t require a doctor’s order, but do require the person to be an adult. With some restrictions, they may permit buying, owning, using, growing, and giving away a small amount of marijuana, but not selling (without a license) or other conduct. States may also license businesses and other entities, and their employees, to engage in regulated commerce involving marijuana.

Regardless of state law, marijuana remains a federal Schedule I controlled substance. As such it can cause heavy penalties for immigrants. Just admitting to DHS that one possessed marijuana, or just being employed in the legitimate cannabis industry, can make a noncitizen inadmissible and conditionally (for a certain time period) barred from establishing good moral character – even if that conduct was permitted under state law.

Example: Carol uses medical marijuana according to her doctor’s instructions, in her own home. This is all legal in her state. But if she admits to DHS that she has done this, she can be found inadmissible and/or conditionally barred from establishing good moral character for admitting a federal controlled substance offense. This is true despite the fact that she never was convicted, she did not use marijuana on federal property, and she used it in accordance with the law of her state.

Example: Silvia used to work in the accounting department of Cannabis, Inc., a major corporation that is legal and duly licensed in her state. She pays state and federal income taxes like any lawful worker. She has never tried marijuana. If she provides her place of employment (for example, she lists it on her I-485 or N-400), DHS will say that it has “reason to believe” she is a drug trafficker. Or, they may ask her questions about the employment and have her “admit” to a federal offense. She can be found inadmissible and/or conditionally barred from establishing good moral character.

Example: Martin is an LPR who uses recreational marijuana legally in his home in Colorado. If he admits to DHS that he has used marijuana more than once, he could be conditionally barred from establishing good moral character required for naturalization, but he would not be deportable. As an LPR remaining within the United States, the only penalty for legal use of marijuana is that he must stop using it for some years before he can naturalize.

But say Martin visits his father in Mexico for a few days, and upon return a border officer finds a photo on his phone showing him in a marijuana shop. She carefully questions Martin, who admits that he uses marijuana sometimes “because it’s legal.” Now Martin is subject to the grounds of inadmissibility, and he is inadmissible. Unless he qualifies for and is granted some relief, like LPR cancellation, he will lose his green card and be permanently barred from the U.S. Or, if Martin had simply re-entered the U.S. after his with no problem, but years later immigration authorities discovered that he was using marijuana before that trip, they might claim that he is deportable for having been inadmissible at last entry (although Martin may have a defense). 

The advice is:

• Stay away from marijuana until you are a U.S. citizen.
• If you truly need medical marijuana, get a legal consult.
• Do not carry marijuana, a medical marijuana card, or marijuana stickers, t-shirts, etc.
• Remove any text or photos relating to marijuana from your social media and phone.
• If you have used marijuana, or worked in the industry, get a legal consult before leaving the United States or applying for naturalization or immigration status. 
• Never discuss conduct involving marijuana with immigration, border, consular, or law enforcement authorities -- unless your immigration attorney has advised that this is safe.