Hacker News Reader

Comment by powertower | Hacker News Reader

Overall, I don't see this as such a bad thing... But every major decision is going to have its outliers.

This is a temp 90-day ban on non-reciprocating countries (and countries of concern), which the FBI said they are not able to properly vet (because those countries will not provide background info on the applicant, and some other reasons). It only affects non-citizens such as visitors, students, or employment visas holders - from leaving the country and coming back, and there seems to be a waiver process to help them.

They already have something like a 7 month backlog of applicants to process. 90 days is going to give them a chance to catch up and look for ways to improve the situation... Such as getting the "Implementing Uniform Screening Standards for All Immigration Programs" part of the order up and running.

View on HN

> This is a temp 90-day ban on non-reciprocating countries (and countries of concern), which the FBI said they are not able to properly vet (because those countries will not provide background info on the applicant, and some other reasons). It only affects non-citizens.

The EO affects ALL legal immigrants from these countries like H1B visa holders and Green Card holders too.

Looks like it also affects dual citizens of those countries as well. per http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38783512

I doubt it will affect anyone with a US passport at the border, but it's about time for the USA to adopt the Japanese policy and simply ban all dual citizenship. If you hold a foreign passport or any kind of documents from a foreign country for its citizens, your US citizenship should be revoked and you should be deported.

Why?

You can be a loyal citizen to only one country. Maintaining two passports is an open declaration of disloyalty and lack of solidarity.

And immigrants shouldn't get special privileges that natural citizens cannot, especially special privileges conferred by foreign princes and potentates.

Are US natural citizens denied the ability to get a foreign citizenship?

There are many countries that don't require a pledge of allegiance for citizenship, so you can't really argue that being a citizen of those countries constitutes a conflict of interest with US citizenship.

Being a citizen of a country typically means that you have certain rights and privileges in that country that non-citizens don't. That's about it. "Loyalty" doesn't enter the picture unless one is a hardcore nationalist.

Choose who to love; Your father ... or your mother. Your father's uncle, but not your mum's brother

Nah, I don't buy the idea, Is plain BS.

Japan is not the only one, I believe China does it too. There is a merit to this, and even though i can see many people would be unhappy to give up their citizenship (basically, you'll be required to have a visa to visit your family, which is big inconvenience), if it's part of the deal, I think many people would still take it.

Most of these though, I feel, should not happen retroactively. In other words, if they are already naturalized citizens and now have two citizenships, they should remain so. US shouldn't go after all the generations who naturalized. It's fair if they require you renounce your former citizenship going forward.

China has a special visitors visa category for foreigners of Chinese ethnicity, which gives them multiple entries over some long time period (could by 1 year, I forget). It's not available to foreigners of Caucasian, African, etc ethnicity.

Not all permanent residents are citizens. Also, it looks like it'll be made permanent unless that country can guarantee that every single person isn't a terrorist. Which seems impossible.

If these countries are not reciprocating as you seem to suggest, why did the US DoS issue them visas in the first place?

Don't tell me that they don't reject visa applications at their diplomatic missions and for reasons related to national security because that's what they do all the time in the ME.

Permanent residents are non-citizens. That's what it means.

Obviously it doesn't affect citizens.

The problem is it affects legal, permanent residents. And innocent people.

Trump is already busy throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

It affects citizens who want to get married to non-citizens.

It gives them an excellent opportunity to move to their new spouses' countries and settle down there.

Wow.

So your great-great-grandparents moved to America, killed most of the local population and now you think you own the place? The USA is made of immigrants.

The sad thing is, those with the most options, who pay the most taxes, will do just that. They'll take their expertise and productivity and contribute them somewhere else. And the racists will congratulate themselves on how smart they are while the country continues its crumbling slide into fascism.

And citizens who are already married to non-citizens.

I'm worried about this. My wife isn't from one of the banned countries, but who knows if that will remain the case in the future?

> This is a temp 90-day ban

Is 90 days a hard limit, or could another order introduce a further 90 days?

It's an executive order, so outside a court challenge that rules this whole class of procedures on immigration unconstitutional, he can do this ad infinitum. But then of course he also frequently invokes Andrew Jackson, whom history remembers as the populist who told the Supreme Court to fuck off when he was behaving unconstitutionally and proceeded to commit genocide against Native Americans.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com