When Executive Order 13769 was issued on January 27, 2017, protesters immediately took to the streets and airports, and news outlets brandished photos of protesters filling airports by the thousands.
The results were clear: there was a definite divide on who supported the executive order and who did not.
Many Americans were uncomfortable or outright angry with the order, which lowered the number of refugees to be admitted into the United States in 2017 and suspended the entry of Syrian refugees indefinitely. Furthermore, section three of the order stated there would be a “Suspension of Issuance of Visas and Other Immigration Benefits to Nationals of Countries of Particular Concern,” which caused many Americans to nickname the executive order Trump’s “Travel Ban.”
The number of protests seemed to rise on a daily basis, and the order did not remain in effect for long — it was temporarily restrained in the State of Washington & State of Minnesota v. Trump case on February 3, 2017. Another version of the executive order was brought back a second time on March 6, 2017, with some changes — one, removing the ban from Iraq.
Although President Trump tweeted the version was “watered down,” it was once again met with a strong amount of protests and ultimately stopped by the courts.
As we enter the middle of July, we are watching the effects of the third version of this order unfold and while there are certainly protests rising once again, there is a noticeable decline in them, specifically around certain airports. When the first two incarnations of this executive order took effect, news coverage of Americans’ reactions seemed endless. Most major news outlets brandished photos and quotes from the protesters, and an endless stream of photographs were readily available.
That wasn’t quite the case this time around.
Denver International Airport, which held one of the most active protests back in January, reported no protests this time around, according to one Denver news outlet.
Is this because the ban has evolved so much that it doesn’t reflect its original draft, or is it only a matter of time until we see Americans’ reactions?
After all, this new version is not completely disconnected, as the Supreme Court in June allowed parts of the order to take effect — particularly parts that either halted or stopped admission of individuals from the countries that were on the list conducted by Homeland Security. This part is what specifically fueled many protests, as the countries on the list held populations that are predominantly Muslim.
If this part of the ban is still in place, why then haven’t we seen the large backlash that the first two versions provided?
One reason we are seeing a slowdown in these protests may have something to do with what was actually approved by the Supreme Court.
Those who have “a credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States” are not supposed to be impacted by the parts of the executive order that were approved, and this has caused a considerable amount of confusion.
Federal judge, Derrick K. Watson of Federal District Court in Honolulu has already challenged what constitutes a bona fide relationship; spouses and fiancés fulfilled the requirement but grandparents did not.
Another effect of the order is in regards to Iraqi people, who while taken off the lists of countries, have began accepting deportees from the United States back into Iraq.
The deportation of individuals has caused protests to begin again.
In the case of Kadhim Al-bumohammed, who was “ordered to pack a bag and report Thursday to a federal immigration office in Albuquerque, chose not to appear and instead sought sanctuary at an undisclosed location,” according to the Albuqueruque Journal.
These events already foretell that Americans are once again finding a certain level of confusion in regards to this ban and anger deriving from banning individuals from certain countries is on the rise. At the moment, America may find itself leaning more toward confusion rather than anger, but just because this is evident now, doesn’t mean it will remain the case.
“Very grateful for the 9-0 decision from the U. S. Supreme Court. We must keep America SAFE!” President Donald Trump tweeted on June 26. Whether America agrees with him will be revealed as the days go by. It’s only a matter of time.
Nichole Harwood is a reporter at the Daily Lobo. She can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org or on Twitter @Nolidoli1.