Mortimer
Gold Member
Most MAGA wont be bothered they even critice Trump for not being even more radical and they want to bann entire continents like the Indian subcontinent and africa but i think its in effect similar not explicitly though because race is not explicitly mentioned by Trump
What’s happening now under Trump’s second term (2025)
On June 4, 2025, Trump signed a new entry ban (a proclamation) that fully suspends entry — immigrant and non-immigrant visas — of nationals from 12 countries (among them: Afghanistan, Somalia, Haiti, plus several Middle-Eastern, African and other countries). �
Wikipedia +2
Additional countries face partial restrictions (some visas temporarily suspended). �
Wikipedia +2
The administration has also ordered a major review and re-examination of Green Cards for immigrants from the “countries of concern.” �
The New Humanitarian +2
After a shooting in Washington D.C. — allegedly by an Afghan national — the government paused all asylum decisions, signaling a much tougher stance on asylum seekers. �
CBS News +2
More broadly, Trump has publicly stated intentions to “permanently pause migration from all ‘Third-World countries’,” and end “federal benefits and subsidies to noncitizens.” �
Immigration Advice Service +2
Bottom line: The recent measures are sweeping — affecting legal immigration, asylum, visas, and permanent residency — and target many countries, especially those with majority-non-white populations or from economically poorer regions.
Why many see this as “more radical” or broadly targeting immigrant communities
Unlike earlier versions of immigration policy that might have focused on certain regions or types of migrants (e.g. refugees, asylum seekers), the 2025 bans are much broader — affecting dozens of countries across continents.
The language used by the administration and rhetoric in public statements (e.g. “Third-World countries,” “non-citizens,” “not a net asset,” “security risk”) tends to lump large, diverse populations together — which critics argue encourages collective targeting rather than case-by-case evaluation.
The sweeping approach means even long-settled immigrant communities or people already in the system might feel under threat due to broad revocation/re-examination of status, not just new arrivals.
From a structural standpoint, measures like halting asylum decisions, re-examining green cards, and restricting legal immigration all contribute to a systemic tightening rather than isolated or narrowly defined security rules.
In effect, many people consider these policies as broadly punitive towards immigrant communities — especially those from poorer, war-torn, or non-Western countries — which can resemble the old-style blanket restrictions on immigration (if not identical in legal form).
Comparison: Now vs. Historic “Racial / Ethnic” Bans
Historic racial-based bans (e.g., Asian Exclusion)
Aspect
Trump 2025 approach
Basis for exclusion
Explicit race/ethnicity (e.g. “Asians,” “Chinese,” certain nationalities)
Countries + security/“vetting failure” rationale (not race explicitly)
Scope
Targeted specific ethnic/racial groups
Broad: dozens of countries, many continents
Legal justification language
Racist, ethnically explicit
Security, public-safety, overstay risk, “foreign threats”
Flexibility / exceptions
Minimal / often none
Some exceptions (e.g. existing visa holders, green-card holders, dual nationals), but many face uncertainty
So while legally the mechanisms are different (race-based vs. country-based), the effect for many people — especially from marginalized countries — can feel similarly exclusionary.
Recent Evidence / Reactions
Immigrant communities from Afghanistan, Somalia, Haiti, several African, Middle Eastern and other countries have expressed fear that these policies “dash their hopes of family reunification or a stable life” in the U.S. �
The Washington Post +2
Human-rights and immigrant-advocacy groups have condemned the policies, arguing they are too broad and discriminate indirectly on the basis of nationality, religion, or region — increasingly reminiscent of past exclusionary eras. �
Wikipedia +2
Many legal and policy analysts warn that the large-scale revocation of protections (e.g. for asylum seekers or refugees) could destabilize immigrant communities and lead to increased deportations or statelessness for vulnerable populations. �
Reuters +2
My View as Your “Brother in Reasoning”
Yes — I do think that under his second term, Trump’s immigration policies are radically stricter and much more sweeping, and they target broad classes of immigrants rather than focusing solely on criminality or individual behavior. While the legal style (country-based, security-justified) is different from old race-based bans, the practical consequences for many communities — especially from poorer or non-Western countries — may feel similarly exclusionary and discriminatory.
If trends continue, his policies might have a lasting impact on how the U.S. is perceived abroad, how immigrant communities inside the country are treated, and how asylum/refuge law is shaped for years.
If you like — I can prepare a short timeline (2025) of all major immigration-related actions by Trump so far, with dates and affected groups — that way you get the full picture in one glance
What’s happening now under Trump’s second term (2025)
On June 4, 2025, Trump signed a new entry ban (a proclamation) that fully suspends entry — immigrant and non-immigrant visas — of nationals from 12 countries (among them: Afghanistan, Somalia, Haiti, plus several Middle-Eastern, African and other countries). �
Wikipedia +2
Additional countries face partial restrictions (some visas temporarily suspended). �
Wikipedia +2
The administration has also ordered a major review and re-examination of Green Cards for immigrants from the “countries of concern.” �
The New Humanitarian +2
After a shooting in Washington D.C. — allegedly by an Afghan national — the government paused all asylum decisions, signaling a much tougher stance on asylum seekers. �
CBS News +2
More broadly, Trump has publicly stated intentions to “permanently pause migration from all ‘Third-World countries’,” and end “federal benefits and subsidies to noncitizens.” �
Immigration Advice Service +2
Bottom line: The recent measures are sweeping — affecting legal immigration, asylum, visas, and permanent residency — and target many countries, especially those with majority-non-white populations or from economically poorer regions.
Why many see this as “more radical” or broadly targeting immigrant communitiesUnlike earlier versions of immigration policy that might have focused on certain regions or types of migrants (e.g. refugees, asylum seekers), the 2025 bans are much broader — affecting dozens of countries across continents.
The language used by the administration and rhetoric in public statements (e.g. “Third-World countries,” “non-citizens,” “not a net asset,” “security risk”) tends to lump large, diverse populations together — which critics argue encourages collective targeting rather than case-by-case evaluation.
The sweeping approach means even long-settled immigrant communities or people already in the system might feel under threat due to broad revocation/re-examination of status, not just new arrivals.
From a structural standpoint, measures like halting asylum decisions, re-examining green cards, and restricting legal immigration all contribute to a systemic tightening rather than isolated or narrowly defined security rules.
In effect, many people consider these policies as broadly punitive towards immigrant communities — especially those from poorer, war-torn, or non-Western countries — which can resemble the old-style blanket restrictions on immigration (if not identical in legal form).
Comparison: Now vs. Historic “Racial / Ethnic” BansHistoric racial-based bans (e.g., Asian Exclusion)
Aspect
Trump 2025 approach
Basis for exclusion
Explicit race/ethnicity (e.g. “Asians,” “Chinese,” certain nationalities)
Countries + security/“vetting failure” rationale (not race explicitly)
Scope
Targeted specific ethnic/racial groups
Broad: dozens of countries, many continents
Legal justification language
Racist, ethnically explicit
Security, public-safety, overstay risk, “foreign threats”
Flexibility / exceptions
Minimal / often none
Some exceptions (e.g. existing visa holders, green-card holders, dual nationals), but many face uncertainty
So while legally the mechanisms are different (race-based vs. country-based), the effect for many people — especially from marginalized countries — can feel similarly exclusionary.
Recent Evidence / ReactionsImmigrant communities from Afghanistan, Somalia, Haiti, several African, Middle Eastern and other countries have expressed fear that these policies “dash their hopes of family reunification or a stable life” in the U.S. �
The Washington Post +2
Human-rights and immigrant-advocacy groups have condemned the policies, arguing they are too broad and discriminate indirectly on the basis of nationality, religion, or region — increasingly reminiscent of past exclusionary eras. �
Wikipedia +2
Many legal and policy analysts warn that the large-scale revocation of protections (e.g. for asylum seekers or refugees) could destabilize immigrant communities and lead to increased deportations or statelessness for vulnerable populations. �
Reuters +2
My View as Your “Brother in Reasoning”Yes — I do think that under his second term, Trump’s immigration policies are radically stricter and much more sweeping, and they target broad classes of immigrants rather than focusing solely on criminality or individual behavior. While the legal style (country-based, security-justified) is different from old race-based bans, the practical consequences for many communities — especially from poorer or non-Western countries — may feel similarly exclusionary and discriminatory.
If trends continue, his policies might have a lasting impact on how the U.S. is perceived abroad, how immigrant communities inside the country are treated, and how asylum/refuge law is shaped for years.
If you like — I can prepare a short timeline (2025) of all major immigration-related actions by Trump so far, with dates and affected groups — that way you get the full picture in one glance
