US President Donald Trump has signed a new proclamation significantly expanding restrictions on foreign nationals entering the United States, citing national security concerns. The measure, which takes effect on June 9, 2025, at 12:01 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time, imposes complete travel bans on citizens from 12 countries and partial entry restrictions on seven others. This policy marks a return to similar measures enacted during Trump's first presidency and follows Executive Order 14161 issued in January 2025, which aimed to bolster U.S. border security by assessing and addressing risks posed by foreign nationals.

The proclamation outlines complete travel bans for nationals from Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen. Partial entry restrictions will apply to citizens of Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela. The order specifies that visas issued before the effective date will not be revoked. President Trump also indicated that the list of countries could be revised in the future, with potential additions, stating, “We will not allow people to enter our country who wish to do us harm.”

The Trump administration has justified these extensive restrictions as necessary to protect the United States against “foreign terrorists” and other security threats. The primary reasons cited for placing countries on the restricted list include allegations that these nations harbor a “large-scale presence of terrorists,” fail to cooperate on visa security measures, are unable to adequately verify travelers’ identities, maintain inadequate criminal history records, and have high rates of their citizens overstaying visas in the U.S. Additionally, concerns were raised about lax screening of travelers and insufficient cooperation from certain governments in accepting deported citizens. President Trump remarked, “We cannot have open migration from any country where we cannot safely and reliably vet and screen those who seek to enter the United States.”

As an example underscoring the perceived need for such restrictions, President Trump pointed to a recent incident in Boulder, Colorado, where an Egyptian national, Mohamed Sabry Soliman, allegedly threw a petrol bomb into a crowd of pro-Israel demonstrators. Federal officials reported that Soliman had overstayed his tourist visa and possessed an expired work permit. Notably, Egypt is not among the countries included in the current travel ban.

Alongside the broader travel ban, President Trump signed an order specifically targeting Harvard University, restricting it from admitting new foreign students for a six-month period. The White House provided several reasons for this action, stating a belief that “the foreign students should be people that can love our country.” It alleged that Harvard is a top overseas academic institution for Chinese Communist Party officials, noting President Xi Jinping’s daughter had studied there. Further accusations included Harvard having a history of foreign ties with potential security implications, failing to provide sufficient information about students’ alleged illegal activities, maintaining extensive contacts with foreign adversaries like China, and that many agitators behind antisemitic incidents were purportedly foreign students.

Harvard University vehemently denounced the executive order, calling it “another illegal retaliatory step taken by the Administration in violation of Harvard’s First Amendment rights.” A Harvard spokesman affirmed the university's commitment to protecting its international students.

This new travel ban echoes policies from Trump's first term, notably the 2017 restrictions on travelers from several majority-Muslim nations. That earlier policy faced significant legal challenges before being upheld by the Supreme Court in 2018 in the case of Trump v. Hawaii, a ruling that affirmed presidential authority in such matters. Former President Joe Biden had repealed those restrictions in 2021, describing them as “a stain on our national conscience.” The reinstatement of a travel ban was a prominent promise during Trump's successful 2024 campaign, often framed with the slogan “promises made, promises kept.” The inclusion of Cuba and Venezuela, countries whose citizens have contributed significantly to arrivals at the U.S.-Mexico border, is considered a notable aspect of the new restrictions.

The international response to the travel ban has been mixed. Somalia, one of the countries facing a full ban, promptly pledged to collaborate with the U.S. to address security concerns. Dahir Hassan Abdi, the Somali ambassador to the United States, stated that Somalia “values its longstanding relationship with the United States and stands ready to engage in dialogue to address the concerns raised.” In contrast, Venezuela reacted defiantly. Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello described the U.S. government as fascist and warned, “The truth is being in the United States is a big risk for anybody, not just for Venezuelans … They persecute our countrymen, our people for no reason.” The decision has also drawn broader criticism, particularly from African nations, which constitute a majority of the affected countries. Critics argue the restrictions unfairly target nations already grappling with instability and security issues and could strain diplomatic ties.

Despite its sweeping nature, the proclamation includes several exemptions. Individuals who may still be permitted entry to the U.S. include: athletes traveling for major sporting events like the World Cup or the Olympics; holders of “immigrant visas for ethnic and religious minorities facing persecution in Iran”; Afghan nationals holding Special Immigrant Visas; lawful permanent residents of the U.S.; and dual nationals whose other citizenship is from a non-restricted country. Furthermore, the Secretary of State is authorized to grant exemptions on a “case-by-case” basis if an individual's entry is deemed to “serve a United States national interest.”

The implementation of these new travel restrictions underscores the Trump administration's continued prioritization of national security as a cornerstone of its foreign and domestic policy. While legally supported by past Supreme Court rulings affirming presidential authority in matters of immigration and national security, the ban has ignited considerable debate regarding its fairness, its practical impact on individuals and diplomatic relations, and its effectiveness in achieving its stated security goals. The global community will be closely watching the implications of this policy as it unfolds.