2
LOGICAL JUSTIFCATION FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP’S MUSLIM BAN
The United States government has in the past implemented controversial foreign
policies that have antagonized its relationship with members of the global community. Similar
to previous administrations, Donald Trump’s government has not been an exception to
criticism from the international community and human rights agencies (Orrenius & Zavodny,
2017. Much of the hysterical rhetoric has been incentivized by President Trump’s executive
order banning the entry of refugees as well as ordinary citizens from Muslim-majority
countries (Orrenius & Zavodny, 2017). The opponents of this foreign policy argue that is
immoral and prejudicial. They go further to assert that President Trump has fundamentally
corrupted the moral fabric of the nation and fuelled hate against America. The following
discussion presents evidence that contrary to popular view, President Trump’s ban on
Muslims is logical and has legal ground.
First, it is important to appreciate the difficulty in having a reasonable discussion on
immigration policies. The problem comes from the fact that the issue has been politicized and
sentimentalized (Ewing, 2016). Hence, even though the legal wording of the Executive order
by President Trump does not include a ban on Muslim as a whole, the opponents of the policy
have been quick to present it as such, invoking the provisions of the Statue of Liberty which
prohibits discrimination based on religious inclination (Orrenius & Zavodny, 2017). On the
contrary, the ban by the government is logical because it does not specify a ban on Muslims.
Rather, it is a ban on all citizens of countries which do not provide adequate information
requisite for vetting of visa applicants (Orrenius & Zavodny, 2017). Besides, the ban is not
absolute since it provides exceptions for foreign nationals who are on a diplomatic visa.
It is incumbent on the president of the United States to make decisions based on facts
and evidence. In adherence to this expectation, Trump’s administration has based its action on
the findings outlined in the Terrorist Prevention Act of 2015 which was enacted by the
preceding administration (Ewing, 2016). The act established that countries such as Iraq,
