The borders of the United States tightened significantly on Tuesday evening. In a sweeping new proclamation, President Trump expanded his administration’s travel ban, adding five nations to the list of countries whose citizens face a total suspension of entry.
This move marks a significant escalation in the White House’s effort to reshape American immigration policy through executive power. By citing “widespread corruption” and “nonexistent birth-registration systems” in the targeted nations, the administration is asserting a broad authority to exclude foreign nationals not just based on individual conduct, but on the perceived failures of their home governments.
The New “No-Go” List
Effective immediately, citizens of Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger, South Sudan, and Syria, as well as individuals holding Palestinian Authority travel documents, face a complete ban on travel to the United States. Additionally, partial bans on Laos and Sierra Leone have been expanded to full suspensions.
The administration’s justification is rooted in information gaps. The proclamation argues that these nations either cannot or will not share the data necessary to properly vet their citizens.
“The restrictions… are necessary to prevent the entry of foreign nationals about whom the United States lacks sufficient information to assess the risks they pose,” the proclamation states.
Beyond the total bans, another 15 countries—including Nigeria and Zimbabwe—face new partial restrictions, creating a complex tiered system of global access to the U.S.
The Shadow of Trump v. Hawaii
Legally, the President is operating on firm ground, cemented by the Supreme Court’s 2018 ruling in Trump v. Hawaii. That decision affirmed the President’s broad authority under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(f) to suspend the entry of any class of aliens if he deems it detrimental to the interests of the United States.
Unlike the chaotic rollout of the 2017 travel ban, which faced immediate court challenges, this expansion is crafted to fit squarely within that legal precedent. By focusing on “security concerns” and “cooperation from foreign governments,” the White House is using the language the Supreme Court explicitly validated.
The Trigger: A Tragedy in D.C.
The timing of this expansion is not coincidental. It follows the tragic shooting of two National Guard soldiers in Washington D.C. over Thanksgiving weekend, allegedly by an Afghan national who entered the U.S. under the previous administration’s parole programs.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem cited the suspect, Rahmanullah Lakanwal, as an example of the dangers of “unvetted” entry. The administration is using this incident—the death of Spc. Sarah Beckstrom and the wounding of Sgt. Andrew Wolfe—as the visceral argument for why “extreme vetting” is not just a slogan, but a national security necessity.
Squeezing Family Immigration
Perhaps the most subtle but impactful change in the proclamation is the narrowing of “broad family-based immigrant visa carve-outs.” The administration claims these categories carry “demonstrated fraud risks.”
This signals a shift away from the family reunification model that has defined U.S. immigration for decades, moving toward a merit-based or security-centric model. By restricting these visas, the President is unilaterally accomplishing a restriction on “chain migration” that Congress has repeatedly failed to pass into law. It is a reminder that in the realm of immigration, the Executive Branch holds a formidable array of tools to close the door, even without a single new vote from the legislature.