Reading mode Exit reading mode

Travel Ban: Muslim-Majority Country Restrictions Through Three Iterations

The travel ban's anti-Muslim intent was documented in Trump's own public statements: before the first order, Trump had called for 'a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States'; Rudy Giuliani publicly stated Trump had asked him how to create 'a Muslim ban' legally. The first order's implementation — without agency coordination, applying immediately to green card holders, causing chaos and hundreds of detentions at airports — forced a broad injunction within hours. Courts repeatedly found discriminatory intent. The Supreme Court ultimately upheld the third version, with Chief Justice Roberts's majority explicitly declining to assess whether the stated national security justification was pretextual.

Record summary

Grade

Grade 4 of 5: Critical Rights and Rule-of-Law Concern

Systematic actions that undermine fundamental constitutional or international legal protections at the structural level. Scale and definitions

Status
Concluded
Incident date
Record updated
Location
Washington, D.C.
Category
Civil Rights
Legal posture
Judicial finding
War-crime classification
Enabling conduct
Verification
Independently verified
ICC relevance
No
Sources
4 cited
Stable ID
trump-immigration-travel-ban-muslim-countries
Victims
Nationals of affected countries separated from family members; visa holders and green card holders stranded abroad; refugee applicants whose resettlement was suspended; Muslim communities in affected countries
Alleged responsible parties
  • Donald Trump, President; signed three successive travel restriction orders; had publicly called for a 'total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States'— White House

Key points

  • In December 2015, Trump called for 'a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on.' Rudy Giuliani later stated on Fox News that Trump had 'called me up... said put a commission together, show me the right way to do it legally'
  • EO 13769 (January 27, 2017) was signed at 4:42 PM on a Friday and took immediate effect; no advance coordination with DHS, State Department, or intelligence agencies; green card holders (lawful permanent residents) were included; hundreds of people were detained at airports within hours; Judge Donnelly in Brooklyn issued an emergency stay before midnight
  • EO 13780 (March 6, 2017) was revised to remove green card holders and Iraq from the list; courts blocked it too, finding discriminatory intent based on Trump's own statements; the Fourth Circuit specifically cited Trump's tweets and campaign statements as evidence of unconstitutional religious discrimination
  • Presidential Proclamation 9645 (September 24, 2017) was the third version, with a more systematic national security review process; the Supreme Court upheld it 5-4 in Trump v. Hawaii (June 26, 2018); Chief Justice Roberts's majority specifically declined to assess whether the national security rationale was pretextual
  • Justice Sotomayor's dissent in Trump v. Hawaii drew an explicit parallel to Korematsu v. United States (the Japanese internment case), and the majority opinion repudiated Korematsu — a case that had never been formally overruled — even as it upheld the travel ban
  • The Supreme Court upheld the third ban but six justices (the four dissenters plus Justices Kennedy and Thomas in concurrence) raised concerns about the president's statements; Kennedy wrote separately that 'an official who was given authority over matters of vast importance to the Nation must know that he remains answerable to the law'

Overview

The travel ban's origins were explicit. In December 2015, Trump called for "a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States." When he took office, Rudy Giuliani went on television to say Trump had asked him to figure out how to do this legally.

The first attempt created immediate chaos. The second was also blocked. The third was upheld by the Supreme Court, which specifically declined to consider whether the national security justification was pretextual.

The Three Orders

Three successive orders reflected an iterative process of adding procedural justifications while keeping the substantive result. The first was rushed into effect on a Friday evening with no agency coordination — green card holders were included, airlines were not told what to do, hundreds were detained, and courts were issuing stays before midnight.

The second removed the most obvious legal problems. The third added a systematic national security review process. Each version was defended as security policy rather than religious discrimination.

The Record

The problem courts faced was the record. Trump had called for a Muslim ban. Giuliani had publicly stated Trump asked him to make a Muslim ban legal. Trump's own national security advisor had said the security review showed no specific threat from the listed countries.

Courts in the Fourth Circuit and Ninth Circuit held this record established discriminatory intent. The Supreme Court majority held it didn't matter for purposes of their analysis. Justice Sotomayor's dissent disagreed, drawing the explicit parallel to Korematsu — the Japanese internment case that had stood unrebuked for 73 years.

The majority opinion in Trump v. Hawaii formally repudiated Korematsu as wrongly decided — and then upheld the ban.

International law engaged

InstrumentProvisionWhat it protects or prohibits
International Covenant on Civil and Political RightsArticle 18Freedom of religion — systematic restriction on entry from Muslim-majority countries without individualized assessment raises Article 18 non-discrimination concerns
Convention Relating to the Status of RefugeesArticle 33Non-refoulement — blanket exclusion of refugee applicants from specified countries

Update log

  1. Updated with Supreme Court ruling.

Sequence of events

  1. Trump calls for 'total and complete shutdown of Muslims'

    Trump releases a campaign statement calling for 'a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States' — the stated origin of the travel ban policy, documented in his own press release.

  2. EO 13769: immediate chaos, airport detentions

    Trump signs the first travel ban at 4:42 PM Friday with immediate effect. No agency coordination. Green card holders included. Hundreds detained at airports. Emergency stay issued before midnight by federal judge.

  3. EO 13780: revised ban — also blocked

    Revised travel ban removes green card holders and Iraq. Courts block it anyway, citing discriminatory intent established by Trump's own public statements.

  4. Presidential Proclamation 9645: third version

    Third version with more procedural cover of national security review. Courts initially block parts; Supreme Court allows enforcement pending full review.

  5. Supreme Court upholds third travel ban 5-4

    Supreme Court upholds the travel ban in Trump v. Hawaii. Majority declines to assess whether the stated national security justification was pretextual. Sotomayor dissent draws parallel to Japanese internment.

Sources

  1. Supreme Court Upholds Travel Ban — The New York Times
  2. Supreme Court upholds Trump travel ban in 5-4 ruling — The Washington Post
  3. Supreme Court upholds Trump travel ban — The Associated Press
  4. Trump v. Hawaii — Supreme Court opinion — U.S. Supreme Court archived ✓

How this record was published

Manually curated This entry was added directly and does not carry an automated audit trail.

About our editorial methodology →

Related records

Similar by category, grade and tags.

  • Grade 5 of 5: War Crime / Crime Against Humanity

    Travel Ban Expansions: From Muslim Ban to Permanent Entry Restrictions

    The travel ban evolved through three executive orders as earlier versions were blocked by courts for discriminatory purpose and due process violations. The third version added non-Muslim-majority countries to provide legal cover, and was upheld by the Supreme Court 5-4 in June 2018. The Court's majority expressly declined to consider Trump's public statements calling for a Muslim ban; Sotomayor's dissent quoted those statements at length and compared the ruling to Korematsu v. United States.

  • Grade 2 of 5: Major Abuse of Power

    Muslim Ban Day One: Airport Detentions, Legal Chaos, Federal Stays

    The executive order was signed without coordination with the Department of Homeland Security, the State Department, the Department of Defense, or the intelligence community. Customs and Border Protection received no guidance before implementation. Within hours, hundreds of travelers from the seven countries — including green card holders, refugees, and visa holders — were detained at airports or turned away from flights. Federal judges in New York, Massachusetts, Virginia, and Washington state issued emergency stays within 24-48 hours. The order was eventually replaced by revised versions that were also challenged legally; the Supreme Court upheld the third version in Trump v. Hawaii (2018).

  • Grade 4 of 5: Critical Rights and Rule-of-Law Concern

    DACA Rescission: Ending Protection for 800,000 Childhood Arrivals

    DACA recipients — sometimes called Dreamers — had arrived in the United States as children, had lived here for years or decades, had submitted to background checks, and had registered with the government in reliance on the Obama administration's promise of temporary protection. Sessions announced the rescission by describing immigrants in terms that critics said echoed nativist rhetoric. The administration's stated legal basis was that DACA was an unconstitutional executive overreach; the Supreme Court did not reach this question, instead finding the rescission procedurally defective — the DHS Secretary had failed to adequately explain the agency's reasoning as required by the APA.

  • Grade 4 of 5: Critical Rights and Rule-of-Law Concern

    Muslim Travel Ban: Executive Orders 13769, 13780, and Presidential Proclamation 9645

    Trump signed an initial travel ban on January 27, 2017, halting entry from seven Muslim-majority countries and suspending the refugee program. After courts blocked it, the administration issued revised versions that scaled back explicit language while preserving the core country-specific restrictions. The Supreme Court allowed a third version to take full effect in December 2017.