An article published by The New York Times on March 14, 2025, details a travel ban proposal under review by the Trump administration affecting 43 countries, categorized using a color-coded triage system (the “Article”). The article is based on a leaked memo. Reportedly, the U.S. Department of State (DOS) submitted this proposed list a few weeks ago, and revisions by the White House are expected. The most stringent level of control, the Red Zone, would impose a complete ban on travel to the U.S. for citizens of 11 countries. In previous travel bans issued by the first Trump administration, discussed below, dual nationals using a passport from a non-restricted country were allowed entry. It remains to be seen whether that exception will apply this time. The final travel ban proposal is expected to be submitted by March 21.
The 10 countries listed in the Orange Zone may face mandatory in-person interviews and possibly travel restrictions for their nationals, including those on immigrant and tourist visas. The article references that “affluent business travelers” may not be included. This suggests that affluent B visa visitors—those potentially creating jobs or engaging in significant business in the U.S.—or E investors might still be admitted. However, this is purely speculation based on the article’s wording.
There is significant uncertainty regarding how these restrictions would apply to both nonimmigrant and immigrant visas. The U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Consular Affairs (BCA) is reportedly the lead agency responsible for preparing the required report, with support from the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security. This report is mandated by the January 20, 2025, Executive Order titled “Protecting the United States from Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats,” and is due on Friday, March 21, 2025. At this time, it remains unclear whether individuals with existing nonimmigrant or immigrant visas would be exempt from the proposed bans, or if current legal permanent residents (green card holders) would be affected.
Apparently, nationals from Yellow Zone countries may receive a 60-day reprieve before a final determination is made on whether they will be moved to the Orange or Red Zone, or possibly removed from the list altogether. The speculated affected nationals and their respective Zones/Levels/Tiers are as follows:
Travel Ban History from the First Trump Administration
Who knows what this new travel ban will end up being? For reference, the following is a summary of the initial 2017 travel ban from the first Trump administration. On March 6, 2017, Executive Order 13769 from the Trump administration applied to nationals from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen.[1] This 2017 Executive Order banned travel to the United States for ninety (90) days of nationals from the listed countries and suspended the resettlement of all Syrian refugees. Lawsuits against the bans resulted in court injunctions temporarily blocking the order, but on June 26, 2018, the Supreme Court allowed the third version of the executive order to be applied.[2] The 2017 Executive Order applied to foreign nationals of the countries affected who were:
- Outside of the United States on the effective date of the order;
- Did not have a valid visa at 5:00 pm Eastern Standard Time on January 27, 2017; and
- Did not have a valid visa on the effective date of the order.
The 2017 Executive Order did not cause visa revocations. [3]
The exceptions from the 2017 Executive Order applied to:
- Legal permanent residents of the United States (green card holders);
- Foreign nationals admitted or paroled into the United States on or after the effective date of the order;
- Foreign nationals with a document, other than a visa, that was valid on the effective date of the order or issued after the date of the order allowing them to travel to the United States to seek admission, such as an advance parole document;
- Dual nationals of a designated country are subject to the travel ban when the individual presents a passport from a non-designated country to travel to the United States;
- Any foreign national using a diplomatic/diplomatic type visa ( A visa, NATO visa, C-2 for travel to the United Nations, G-1 to G-4 visa); or
- Foreign nationals granted asylum, refugees already admitted to the United States, individuals granted withholding of removal, advance parole, or protection under the Convention Against Torture.
Potential case-by-case waivers of the travel ban were applied as follows:
- Foreign nationals previously admitted to the United States for a continuous period of work, study, or other long-term activity, who were outside the United States on the effective date of the order and seek to reenter the United States to resume that activity, and the denial of reentry during the suspension period would impair that activity;
- Foreign nationals who previously established significant contacts with the United States but were outside the United States on the effective date of the order for work, study, or other lawful activity;
- Foreign nationals who sought to enter the United States for significant business or professional obligations and the denial of entry during the suspension period would impair those obligations;
- Foreign nationals who sought to enter the United States to visit or reside with a close family member (e.g., a spouse, child, or parent) who is a United States citizen, lawful permanent resident, or foreign national lawfully admitted on a valid nonimmigrant visa, and the denial of entry during the suspension period would cause undue hardship;
- Foreign nationals who are infants, young children or adoptees, an individual needing urgent medical care, or someone whose entry was otherwise justified by the special circumstances of the case;
- Foreign nationals who had been employed by, or on behalf of, the United States Government (or is an eligible dependent of such an employee) and the employee could document that they had provided faithful and valuable service to the United States Government;
- Foreign nationals traveling for purposes related to an international organization designated under the International Organizations Immunities Act (IOIA), 22 USC §288 et seq., traveling for purposes of conducting meetings or business with the United States Government, or traveling to conduct business on behalf of an international organization not designated under the IOIA;
- Foreign nationals who were landed Canadian immigrants who applied for a visa at a location within Canada; OR
- Foreign nationals traveling as a United States Government-sponsored exchange visitor (J-1).
Some other points to remember from the implementing Federal Register notice concerning this order are as follows:
- The Visa Interview Waiver Program was suspended, thus requiring in-person interviews for all nonimmigrant visa applicants under 8 USC § 1202, §222 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended (INA).
- Reciprocity Agreements for visa validity were reviewed.
- Refugee admissions in fiscal year 2017 were restricted to 50,000.
- More intensive screening standards for visa interviews were implemented.
Due to multiple legal challenges and the Supreme Court’s ruling in Trump v. Hawaii, the third version of the Trump administration’s travel bans, Presidential Proclamation 9645, was ultimately allowed to take full effect. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the five-member majority, held that the President had the authority under INA §212(f) to impose travel restrictions based on a determination that the entry of certain foreign nationals would be detrimental to the U.S.
For those currently outside the U.S., it is crucial to consider returning soon, as the final report on the travel ban recommendations is due on March 21, 2025. However, there is still no clarity on when the bans or restrictions will actually take effect or what their full scope will be.
[1] See 82 Fed. Reg. 8977 (Jan. 27, 2017).
[2] See Trump v. Hawaii, 585 US 667 (June 26, 2018) https://www.npr.org/2018/06/26/606481548/supreme-court-upholds-trump-travel-ban and https://harvardlawreview.org/print/vol-132/trump-v-hawaii/ .
[3] See September 24, 2017 Fact Sheet: The President’s Proclamation on Enhancing Vetting Capabilities and Processes for Detecting Attempted Entry into the United States by Terrorists or Other Public-Safety Threats https://www.dhs.gov/archive/news/2017/09/24/fact-sheet-presidents-proclamation-enhancing-vetting-capabilities-and-processes .
[View source.]
