Travel ban: It’s needed for improved U.S. security

Despite the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal’s ruling on Thursday, there is still a great deal of confusion over the president’s executive order. Let’s clear up a few misconceptions about what this travel ban represents.

In the interest of national security, a president clearly has the authority to restrict immigration or travel from hostile states under federal immigration law Section 1182 (f). The key phrase: “… (the President may) suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem appropriate.”

Keep in mind that this is a temporary ban that directly impacts only seven nations, which were originally identified by the Obama administration. Three of the countries are already on the State Department’s State Sponsors of Terrorism list: Iran, Sudan and Syria.

According to a 2016 report by the U.S. Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest, at least 60 individuals born in those seven countries have been convicted of terror-related crimes since Sept. 11, 2001.

It is important to note that President Donald Trump’s executive order does not prevent legal permanent residents or green card holders from leaving or returning to the United States.

America still remains open to the world. According to the Homeland Security Administration, only a small percentage (.0004) of the 80 million international travelers who visit the United States annually have been subject to restrictions or additional scrutiny.

In terms of religious discrimination, Judge Richard Clifton pointed out in Tuesday’s Ninth Circuit Court hearing that roughly less than 15 percent of the world’s Muslim population is actually affected by the ban. National Public Radio’s analysis puts the figure even lower, at 12 percent. The world’s largest Muslim-majority nation, Indonesia, is not affected at all.

Here in Hawaii, we’ve been shaped by various waves of legal immigration that have benefited our economy and enriched our culture. At the same time, we have to be aware of the national security implications of providing easy entry to any group of people claiming political asylum or refugee status.

We should learn from Europe’s unfortunate recent experience with the unrestricted flows of refugees and immigrants. After witnessing a string of bloody terrorist attacks in France, Germany and Belgium in the past year, those nations have been forced to rethink their own policies.

In the context of this new reality, Hawaii Attorney General Doug Chin’s attack on the temporary ban and the legislative proposals to designate Hawaii a “Sanctuary State” are particularly disingenuous.

On one hand, Chin’s suit against the temporary ban deplores the alleged discrimination against Muslims and then implicitly argues against the executive order’s directive allowing America to accept persecuted Christians and other religious minorities from those designated countries.

Ignoring the national security concerns we should all share, Chin chooses to cite the potential impact on tourism, but acknowledges that out of 8.7 million visitors to Hawaii in 2015, only 6,800 actually came from the Middle East and not necessarily from the restricted countries.

If Hawaii becomes a “Sanctuary State,” we need to take into account the social, economic and environmental consequences of becoming a magnet for lawbreakers and illegal aliens.

We already face the challenge of homelessness and providing social services to our neediest residents. How will these refugees and illegal aliens be housed, educated and employed, and at what cost to Hawaii?

Legal immigration has been a net plus for Hawaii and our country. America has a proud history of offering a safe haven for those fleeing political and religious persecution.

We should continue to honor that tradition, but it is only by developing a well-reasoned immigration policy that emphasizes America’s security first that we can balance our own needs with our moral responsibility as a nation.

Bob McDermott, a state House representative, is a member of the Honolulu County Republican Party Committee and the Republican Roundtable, which is comprised of all GOP elected officials.