Lt. Col. Kamal S. Kalsi Criticizes Trump’s Travel Ban as Ineffective and Discriminatory

Court Strikes Down Trump’s Initial Travel Ban

In early February, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco unanimously ruled against President Donald Trump’s executive order, which sought to ban refugees and citizens of seven Muslim-majority nations from entering the U.S.

The Administration’s Second Attempt at a Travel Ban

Despite the court ruling, the administration introduced an updated executive order that still fails to enhance national security. The revised ban, signed on Monday, continues the same discriminatory policy under a different guise.

Lack of Evidence Supporting the Ban

No federal agency or intelligence report has validated the claim that refugees and immigrants from the banned countries pose a real threat to the U.S. A Department of Homeland Security report further casts doubt on the necessity of the executive order.

Stephen Miller’s Controversial Defense of the Ban

White House advisor Stephen Miller, lacking legal expertise, defended the first executive order, admitting that the revised version would lead to the “same basic policy outcome.” This reveals the administration’s persistent attempt to impose a religious test for entry into the U.S.

A Flawed and Ineffective Policy

Both versions of the executive order are deeply flawed. The notion that banning travelers from specific countries will ensure national security is baseless. Historical data shows that immigrants from the banned nations have not caused any deaths in the U.S. since 1975.

Delays That Undermine the National Security Argument

If the travel ban were genuinely about national security, the administration wouldn’t have delayed its implementation twice. This highlights the political motivations behind the order rather than genuine safety concerns.

Superficial Changes Do Not Fix the Problem

While the administration removed Iraq from the list of banned countries and deleted the clause favoring Christian refugees, these minor adjustments do not address the core issue. The executive order remains an abdication of American leadership and values.

Lt. Col. Kalsi’s Personal Perspective on Immigration

Having served in the U.S. Army for over 16 years, Lt. Col. Kamal S. Kalsi has witnessed the struggles of refugees firsthand. As an immigrant himself, he strongly believes in America’s diversity and its responsibility to welcome those fleeing violence and persecution.

Real Stories of Refugee Hardships

The case of Nael Zaino, a Syrian refugee denied entry despite having an American-born son, is one of many heartbreaking stories. The travel ban disrupts families and tarnishes America’s reputation as a land of opportunity and refuge.

Legal and Ethical Implications of the Ban

Even with exemptions for military allies and green card holders, the ban remains discriminatory. The U.S. already has a stringent vetting process for refugees, making this executive order unnecessary and cruel.

The American Spirit Will Prevail

Despite these challenges, the protests, legal battles, and widespread opposition to the ban reflect the resilience of the American people. The nation thrives when it embraces diversity, and the fight against discriminatory policies will continue.

About Lt. Col. Kamal S. Kalsi

Lt. Col. Kamal S. Kalsi is a U.S. Army officer, ER doctor, and expert in disaster medicine. Having served in Afghanistan, he currently contributes to national security efforts as part of the Army Reserve and the Truman National Security Project’s Defense Council.