Experts say that Trump’s new pitfalls are facing the last attempt

US President Donald Trump has issued a new comprehensive travel ban from 12 countries, to reconsider his first -term policy in his first term.

There are some main differences, however.

The prohibition of the original travel of a series of legal defeats suffered. This time, it seems that the policy has been designed to avoid the same pitfalls.

Her predecessor, which targeted seven Muslim countries, was mostly called, called “Islamic Ban” by critics, just one week after Trump took office in 2017, during his first term in the White House.

The ban was twice to overcome the challenges of the court, after the opponents argued that it was unconstitutional and illegal because it was distinguished against travelers based on their religion.

Ultimately, a size version in the United States was supported by the US Supreme Court in 2018, which looks like this new ban closely.

Legal experts told the BBC that Trump seems to be learning lessons from his first attempt.

Christie Jackson, an expert in the United States Immigration Law at Laura Devine Immigration in London, said the new ban was more legally powerful as a result.

She said that although the first lacked “clarity”, the new restrictions were “broader in the range” and were “clearly identified”.

While there are some similarities in the countries chosen by the ban on the year 2017 and the ban on 2025, the Islamic majority countries are not the explicit goal of the latest demand.

Barbara McCadad, a professor of law at the University of Michigan and a former American lawyer in the eastern region of Michigan, told the BBC Worlding service, who appears to be likely to win the approval of the Supreme Court if this level is referred to.

The 12 countries that are subject to the harshest restrictions are located from June 9 in the Middle East, Africa and the Caribbean, including Afghanistan, Iran and Somalia.

There will be partial restrictions on travelers from seven other countries, including Cuban and Venerable citizens.

Trump said the power of restrictions will be classified against the intensity of the perceived threat, including terrorism.

But besides Iran, none of the 12 countries that are presented by the explicit ban on the state sponsors list in the United States government have been named.

Trump was martyred on Sunday in Buldir, Colorado, where a man was accused of throwing Molotov cocktails in the demonstrators who attended a march of Israeli hostages, in a video clip announcing the ban on X.

The alleged striker was an Egyptian citizen. However, Egypt does not appear on any of the list.

Trump also identified high rates of people who have exceeded their visas as a reason for the inclusion of certain countries.

However, Stephen de Heller, a lawyer for immigration in the United States, said that there was “lack of clarity” about what the threshold should have met with an exaggerated rate by this country on the Trump ban list. This was proposed to a successful legal challenge.

“If they rely on the idea of ​​excessive prices … they must define the meaning of this already,” he told the BBC.

But he pointed out that the current American law gave the president broad powers on the immigration policy.

Unlike the first ban, which was scheduled to last for 90 to 120 days, it has no date today.

He was dismayed in the targeted countries.

Venezuela described the Trump administration as “suspended who believe they own the world”, although Somalia has pledged “to engage in a dialogue to address the concerns raised.”

The original embargo motivated the mass protests and sowing chaos at American airports.

It was canceled in 2021 by Khalaf Trump, President Joe Biden, who called a “stigma on our national conscience.”

Immigration lawyer Shabnam Lootvi, who challenged the previous travel ban, said it would be a “arduous battle” to cancel the new battle.

“The president has the authority to determine who is acceptable to the United States,” she said, adding that because of the way the ban was written, it was difficult to find a huge group of people who could file a collective lawsuit.

“They put more thinking about it.”

Mrs. Lufti noted that new restrictions could have consequences for students and other visa applicants abroad.

“Students who stumble in administrative treatment are affected. As well as the lottery winners in the diversity visa who paid fees and went to interviews – they are unlikely to get visas now,” she said.

“Even EB -5 investors – people who have placed more than a million dollars in the US economy – are affected. H -1B visa holders can also be banned, pending a return to their employers in the United States.”

Additional reports by night Khudabakhshi