Trump Travel Ban

The Trump Era travel ban has ruffled a lot of feathers. People suggest the travel ban goes against the rights of U.S. citizens, residents, and people on visa. President Donald Trump’s actions has led to fierce criticism on both the Republic and Democratic sides as well as bring about legal challenges. Many Americans agree that the temporary banning of refugees and immigration from specific countries is wrong. They agree because they feel it is not necessary in guaranteeing the safety of the United States. While the travel ban allows some Americans to feel safe during an age where terrorism dominates, it creates racial tension and hatred; additionally, banning certain countries or immigration has been done in the United States before, showing a dark side to the nation.
Terrorism is a prevailing topic across the globe. From London to France, terrorism and immigration problems have generated an uneasy atmosphere that has shown a perceived increase in crime, terrorist propaganda and massacres. However, this perception is flawed. There has been a decrease in terrorist attacks, with an increase only in severity (Foley) If the United States under President Trump wishes to protect itself and its people by limiting who can come into the country, this may not be the best route. The thing that is important to understand is that the banning of these countries is nothing new.
Going back more than a century, the Chinese Exclusion Act kept Chinese immigrants from moving to the United States and those that were in the United States, from gaining citizenship. “Chinese Exclusion Act stops immigration of Chinese for one decade and stops Chinese from being U.S. citizens.” (Soennichsen xiv) It took years for Chinese people and Chinese Americans to gain any kind of foothold within the United States. The American government did this to maintain ‘stability’ in the American economy.
The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 demonstrated the first major law that restricted immigration into the country. Those living in the West Coast saw the Chinese workers as direct competitors and attributed economic ills and declining wages to their immigration. The act placated worker demands and allowed satisfaction for those wishing to maintain white ‘racial purity’. (Gyory) The motives behind the exclusion were deeply seeded in racism and demonstrates the ugly side of the American government. The same was done to the Japanese in WWI, but not for the idea of ‘racial purity’ rather, for the ‘safety’ of the American public, showing repeat sentiments in the present.
The Immigration Act of 1924 effectively banned immigration from Japan. “Continued efforts to defuse the situation through diplomacy, such as relying on voluntary restriction of emigration enforced by the Japanese government, ended in 1924 when the U.S. Congress passed the Immigration Act, which effectively denied immigration from Japan.” (Oshima) It was an effort to quell fears of Americans and their beliefs concerning the Japanese at that time. This is an excellent example of how history repeats itself and begs to ask if the same actions could quell fears of Islamic fundamentalism today. The answer is no, the ban did nothing to improve the fears of Americans during WWI and instead created disharmony and racism.
While it’s true the Islamic fundamentalism and the terrorist regimes that have surfaced because of certain beliefs has increased the severity of terrorism-related attacks in the United States and around the world, this is not the fault of most Muslims and those that practice the Islamic faith. In reality, the fault belongs to ISIS “…Experts said ISIS, responsible for seven of the 10 deadliest attacks since 2012, was increasingly encouraging the use of knives and vehicles over firearms and explosives by their followers.” (Hanrahan and Wang) More people have come out in support of measures to curb potential terrorist attacks through diplomacy rather than ineffective measures like bans.
In conclusion, the Trump Era travel ban is not necessary for the safety of the American public. At least in the sense of calming anxieties. It has been done before with the Japanese. It is unfair and ineffective.



Works Cited
Foley, Frank. Countering Terrorism in Britain and France: Institutions, Norms and the Shadow of the Past. Cambridge University Press, 2015.
Gyory, Andrew. Closing the Gate: Race, Politics, and the Chinese Exclusion Act. Univ of North Carolina Press, 2000.
Hanrahan, Mark, and Jessica Wang. "Number of Fatal Terrorist Attacks in Western Europe Increasing, Data S." U.S, 12 July 2017, www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-attacks/number-of-fatal-terrorist-attacks-in-western-europe-increasing-data-show-idUSKBN19X1QO. Accessed 16 Dec. 2017.
Oshima, Shotaro. "Why the 1920s U.S. Ban on Japanese Immigrants Matters Today." HuffPost, 22 Dec. 2015, www.huffingtonpost.com/shotaro-oshima/1920s-us-ban-japanese_b_8858260.html. Accessed 16 Dec. 2017.
Seonnichsen, John. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. ABC-CLIO, 2011.