Tech giants such as Amazon Inc and Facebook Inc have taken a stand against ban on entry of foreign workers in the US, announced by Donald Trump.

The US President Donald Trump announced a Presidential proclamation announcing a temporary ban on the entry of certain foreign workers in the United States. Workers entering the country on H-1B visas and managers and specialised workers being transferred within a company on L visas — both visa types used by tech companies — will be the ones affected by it. Seasonal workers, who enter the country on H2B visas will also face the ban.

Trump defended his decision by saying that this will help preserve jobs for Americans after the economy has been badly hit by the pandemic.

However, this decision was not well received by tech-giants who feel this will restrict the functioning and growth of several Multi-National Companies (MNCs), based in the US.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-signs-executive-order-against-hiring-h1b-visa-holders-for-federal-contracts-318023">Also read:&nbsp;Trump signs executive order against hiring H1B visa holders for federal contracts</a>

Amazon Inc and Facebook Inc, on Monday,&nbsp;filed a legal brief backing a challenge against Trump on this issue. The lawsuit has been brought in California by few of the major US business associations.&nbsp;

In the brief, the companies argued that the visa restrictions will hurt American businesses, lead employers to hire workers outside the United States, and further damage the already struggling US economy.

The group of companies has alleged Trump of causing an irreparable damage to the US economy and workforce, on an assumption rather than facts.

“Global competitors in Canada, China, and India, among others, are pouncing at the opportunity to attract well-trained, innovative individuals,” the brief reads. “And American businesses are scrambling to adjust, hiring needed talent to work in locations outside our nation’s borders.”

Apple (AAPL.O), Microsoft (MSFT.O), Netflix (NFLX.O) and Twitter (TWTR.N) were among 52 companies that signed the brief, which was filed in a lawsuit brought by the National Association of Manufacturers, which represents 14,000 member companies, as well as in a similar lawsuit brought in Washington, D.C.

(With inputs from Reuters)

Tech giants such as Amazon Inc and Facebook Inc have taken a stand against ban on entry of foreign workers in the US, announced by Donald Trump. The US President Donald Trump announced a Presidential proclamation announcing a temporary ban on the entry of certain foreign workers in the United States.

Tech giants such as Amazon Inc and Facebook Inc have taken a stand against ban on entry of foreign workers in the US, announced by Donald Trump. The US President Donald Trump announced a Presidential proclamation announcing a temporary ban on the entry of certain foreign workers in the United States. Workers entering the country on H-1B visas and managers and specialised workers being transferred within a company on L visas — both visa types used by tech companies — will be the ones affected by it. Seasonal workers, who enter the country on H2B visas will also face the ban. Trump defended his decision by saying that this will help preserve jobs for Americans after the economy has been badly hit by the pandemic. However, this decision was not well received by tech-giants who feel this will restrict the functioning and growth of several Multi-National Companies (MNCs), based in the US. Also read: Trump signs executive order against hiring H1B visa holders for federal contracts Amazon Inc and Facebook Inc, on Monday, filed a legal brief backing a challenge against Trump on this issue. The lawsuit has been brought in California by few of the major US business associations. In the brief, the companies argued that the visa restrictions will hurt American businesses, lead employers to hire workers outside the United States, and further damage the already struggling US economy. The group of companies has alleged Trump of causing an irreparable damage to the US economy and workforce, on an assumption rather than facts. “Global competitors in Canada, China, and India, among others, are pouncing at the opportunity to attract well-trained, innovative individuals,” the brief reads. “And American businesses are scrambling to adjust, hiring needed talent to work in locations outside our nation’s borders.” Apple (AAPL.O), Microsoft (MSFT.O), Netflix (NFLX.O) and Twitter (TWTR.N) were among 52 companies that signed the brief, which was filed in a lawsuit brought by the National Association of Manufacturers, which represents 14,000 member companies, as well as in a similar lawsuit brought in Washington, D.C. (With inputs from Reuters)

Amazon, Facebook and 50 others file lawsuit against Trump's ban of H1B visa

In a televised address to the nation, <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-refuses-to-sign-us-government-shutdown-legislation-over-mexico-wall-funding-185571">US President Trump said today</a> that US-Mexico border situation was a "growing crisis" while demanding $5.7 billion for steel barrier on the Mexico border from Democrats.

"There is a growing humanitarian and <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/no-signed-agreement-with-us-on-asylum-seekers-mexico-185795">security crisis at our southern </a>border," the president said during his address from the Oval Office, adding that every day US Customs and border patrol agents "encounter thousands of illegal immigrants trying to enter our country."

Trump said the Mexico border wall was "absolutely critical to border security."

"As part of an overall approach to border security, law enforcement professionals have requested $5.7 billion for a physical barrier," Trump asserted during his address to the nation.

Although reports said Trump would be declaring a state of national emergency, however, the US president did not mention it during his address.

"America proudly welcomes millions of lawful immigrants who enrich our society and contribute to our nation. But all Americans are hurt by uncontrolled illegal migration. It strains public resources, and drives down jobs and wages. Among those hardest hit are African-Americans and Hispanic Americans," the US president said.

Trump's addressed the nation as the country entered the seventeenth day of the partial shutdown with several US departments closed since December 21st.

"In the last two years, ICE officers made 266,000 arrests of aliens with criminal records, including those charged or convicted of 100,000 assaults; 30,000 sex crimes and 4,000 violent killings," Trump said, adding,"over the years, thousands of Americans have been brutally killed by those who illegally entered our country, and thousands of more lives will be lost if we don't act right now."

"This is a humanitarian crisis - a crisis of the heart and a crisis of the soul."

"Last month, 20,000 migrant children were illegally brought into the United States - a dramatic increase. These children are used as human pawns, by vicious coyotes and ruthless gangs. One in three women are sexually assaulted on the dangerous trek up through Mexico. Women and children are the biggest victims by far of our broken system," President Trump declared.

"This is the tragic reality of illegal immigration on our southern border. This is the cycle of human suffering that I am determined to end," he asserted.

"When I took office, I swore to protect this country and that is what I will always do," Trump said as he closed his address.

Just after President Trump's televised address got over, Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi in an another televised address said that Trump must stop holding America "hostage&nbsp;over shutdown".

"President Trump must stop holding the American people hostage, must stop manufacturing a crisis, and must re-open the government," Pelosi said.

In a televised address to the nation, US President Trump said today that US-Mexico border situation was a "growing crisis" while demanding $5.7 billion for steel barrier on the Mexico border from Democrats.

In a televised address to the nation, US President Trump said today that US-Mexico border situation was a "growing crisis" while demanding $5.7 billion for steel barrier on the Mexico border from Democrats. "There is a growing humanitarian and security crisis at our southern border," the president said during his address from the Oval Office, adding that every day US Customs and border patrol agents "encounter thousands of illegal immigrants trying to enter our country." Trump said the Mexico border wall was "absolutely critical to border security." "As part of an overall approach to border security, law enforcement professionals have requested $5.7 billion for a physical barrier," Trump asserted during his address to the nation. Although reports said Trump would be declaring a state of national emergency, however, the US president did not mention it during his address. "America proudly welcomes millions of lawful immigrants who enrich our society and contribute to our nation. But all Americans are hurt by uncontrolled illegal migration. It strains public resources, and drives down jobs and wages. Among those hardest hit are African-Americans and Hispanic Americans," the US president said. Trump's addressed the nation as the country entered the seventeenth day of the partial shutdown with several US departments closed since December 21st. "In the last two years, ICE officers made 266,000 arrests of aliens with criminal records, including those charged or convicted of 100,000 assaults; 30,000 sex crimes and 4,000 violent killings," Trump said, adding,"over the years, thousands of Americans have been brutally killed by those who illegally entered our country, and thousands of more lives will be lost if we don't act right now." "This is a humanitarian crisis - a crisis of the heart and a crisis of the soul." "Last month, 20,000 migrant children were illegally brought into the United States - a dramatic increase. These children are used as human pawns, by vicious coyotes and ruthless gangs. One in three women are sexually assaulted on the dangerous trek up through Mexico. Women and children are the biggest victims by far of our broken system," President Trump declared. "This is the tragic reality of illegal immigration on our southern border. This is the cycle of human suffering that I am determined to end," he asserted. "When I took office, I swore to protect this country and that is what I will always do," Trump said as he closed his address. Just after President Trump's televised address got over, Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi in an another televised address said that Trump must stop holding America "hostage over shutdown". "President Trump must stop holding the American people hostage, must stop manufacturing a crisis, and must re-open the government," Pelosi said.

Watch: Growing humanitarian, security crisis at our southern border, says Trump in televised address

The Department of Justice is deploying 50 judges to immigration detention facilities across the United States, according to two sources and a letter seen by Reuters and sent to judges on Thursday.

The department is also considering asking judges to sit from 6 am&nbsp;to 10 pm, split between two rotating shifts, to adjudicate more cases, the sources said. A notice about shift times was not included in the letter.

The Justice Department did not respond to a request for comment.

On Jan&nbsp;25 President Donald Trump issued an executive order aimed at speeding up deportations and holding migrants in detention until their cases can be heard.

Trump campaigned on a pledge to get tougher on the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants, playing on fears of violent crime while promising to build a wall on the border with Mexico and to stop potential terrorists from entering the country.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>Immigration courts have a backlog of over 550,000 cases, according to the Justice Department&#39;s data, so many court dates are set years into the future</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Immigration courts have a backlog of over 550,000 cases, according to the Justice Department's data, so many court dates are set years into the future" target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

The order called for the end of a policy known as &quot;catch and release&quot;, by which immigrants were released from detention and given a date to appear in court.

Immigration courts have a backlog of over 550,000 cases, according to the Justice Department&#39;s data, so many court dates are set years into the future.

Judges are employed by the Justice Department to oversee cases that determine if immigrants are given protections, such as asylum, or ordered deported. A handful of judges works from detention centres but most work from courts around the country.

Two sources familiar with the Justice Department&#39;s plan said the department would ask more judges to volunteer for one or two-month deployments at detention centres. If the department cannot find enough volunteers, the department would assign judges to detention centres, the sources said.

Judges who volunteer for the first 50 deployments would be sent to detention centres in Adelanto, California; San Diego, Chicago and elsewhere, according to the letter.

Republican Trump&#39;s policy on immigrants has been criticised by Democratic lawmakers and advocates for immigrants, who said he was jeopardising the rights and freedoms of millions while treating Mexico as an enemy, not an ally, and damaging the country&#39;s reputation as a welcoming place for immigrants.

(Reuters)

The move is aimed at speeding up deportations

The Department of Justice is deploying 50 judges to immigration detention facilities across the United States, according to two sources and a letter seen by Reuters and sent to judges on Thursday. The department is also considering asking judges to sit from 6 am to 10 pm, split between two rotating shifts, to adjudicate more cases, the sources said. A notice about shift times was not included in the letter. The Justice Department did not respond to a request for comment. On Jan 25 President Donald Trump issued an executive order aimed at speeding up deportations and holding migrants in detention until their cases can be heard. Trump campaigned on a pledge to get tougher on the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants, playing on fears of violent crime while promising to build a wall on the border with Mexico and to stop potential terrorists from entering the country. Immigration courts have a backlog of over 550,000 cases, according to the Justice Department's data, so many court dates are set years into the future × The order called for the end of a policy known as "catch and release", by which immigrants were released from detention and given a date to appear in court. Immigration courts have a backlog of over 550,000 cases, according to the Justice Department's data, so many court dates are set years into the future. Judges are employed by the Justice Department to oversee cases that determine if immigrants are given protections, such as asylum, or ordered deported. A handful of judges works from detention centres but most work from courts around the country. Two sources familiar with the Justice Department's plan said the department would ask more judges to volunteer for one or two-month deployments at detention centres. If the department cannot find enough volunteers, the department would assign judges to detention centres, the sources said. Judges who volunteer for the first 50 deployments would be sent to detention centres in Adelanto, California; San Diego, Chicago and elsewhere, according to the letter. Republican Trump's policy on immigrants has been criticised by Democratic lawmakers and advocates for immigrants, who said he was jeopardising the rights and freedoms of millions while treating Mexico as an enemy, not an ally, and damaging the country's reputation as a welcoming place for immigrants. (Reuters)

Trump administration deploying 50 judges to immigration detention facilities: Sources

President Donald Trump&#39;s order temporarily banning US&nbsp;entry to people from seven Muslim-majority countries came under intense scrutiny on Tuesday from a federal appeals court that questioned whether the ban unfairly targeted people over their religion.

During a more than hour-long oral argument, a three-judge panel of the 9th US&nbsp;Circuit Court of Appeals pressed a government lawyer whether the Trump administration&#39;s national security argument was backed by evidence that people from the seven countries posed a danger.

Judge Richard Clifton, a George W&nbsp;Bush appointee, posed equally tough questions for an attorney representing Minnesota and Washington states, which are challenging the ban. Clifton asked if a Seattle judge&#39;s suspension of Trump&#39;s policy was &quot;overbroad&quot;.

The 9th Circuit said at the end of the session it would issue a ruling as soon as possible. Earlier on Tuesday, the court said it would likely rule this week but would not issue a same-day ruling. The matter will ultimately likely go to the US&nbsp;Supreme Court.

Trump&#39;s January&nbsp;27 order barred travelers from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen from entering for 90 days and all refugees for 120 days, except refugees from Syria, whom he would ban indefinitely.

Trump, who took office on January&nbsp;20, has defended the measure, the most divisive act of his young presidency, as necessary for national security.

The order sparked protests and chaos at US&nbsp;and overseas airports. Opponents also assailed it as discriminatory against Muslims in violation of the US&nbsp;Constitution and applicable laws.

A federal judge in Seattle suspended the order last Friday and many travelers who had been waylaid by the ban quickly moved to travel to the United States while it was in limbo.

August Flentje, representing the Trump administration as special counsel for the US&nbsp;Justice Department, told the appellate panel that &quot;Congress has expressly authorised the president to suspend entry of categories of aliens&quot; for national security reasons.

&quot;That&rsquo;s what the president did here,&quot; Flentje said at the start of the oral argument conducted by telephone and live-streamed on the internet.

&nbsp;

TOUGH QUESTIONING

When the 9th Circuit asked Flentje what evidence the executive order had used to connect the seven countries affected by the order with terrorism in the United States, Flentje said the &quot;proceedings have been moving very fast,&quot; without giving specific examples.

He said both Congress and the previous administration of Democrat Barack Obama had determined that those seven countries posed the greatest risk of terrorism and had in the past put stricter visa requirements on them.

&quot;I&#39;m not sure I&#39;m convincing the court,&quot; Flentje said at one point.

Noah Purcell, solicitor general for the state of Washington, began his argument urging the court to serve &quot;as a check on executive abuses&quot;.

&quot;The president is asking this court to abdicate that role here,&quot; Purcell said. &quot;The court should decline that invitation.&quot;

The judges pummeled both sides with questions. Clifton pushed both attorneys about whether there was evidence the ban was intended to discriminate against Muslims. &quot;I don&#39;t think allegations cut it at this stage,&quot; Clifton told Purcell.

Clifton later questioned Flentje after the attorney argued the Seattle judge had second-guessed Trump&#39;s order &quot;based on some newspaper articles.&quot;

The judge referred to recent televised statements by former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who advised Trump during his campaign and transition, that the president had asked him for advice about implementing a legal Muslim ban.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
This statement by Giuliani could become very problematic for the Trump administration in litigation over intent/pretext of executive order. <a href="https://t.co/MrRuDFJGwD">pic.twitter.com/MrRuDFJGwD</a>
&mdash; JP SchnapperCasteras (@jpscasteras) <a href="https://twitter.com/jpscasteras/status/825717327635349504">January 29, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

Shortly after the executive order was announced, Former New York mayor and top Trump ally&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/rudy-giuliani-told-trump-how-to-make-muslim-ban-legal-11841">Rudy Giuliani</a> went on Fox News and explained the history of what&nbsp;Donald Trump himself, according to Giuliani, called&nbsp;a &quot;Muslim ban&quot;. Trump asked how to make a Muslim ban legal, and Giuliani sent it to legal experts who determined they needed to reframe the ban. If the ban focused on &quot;security&quot;, then it could be legal, according to Giuliani.

&quot;Do you deny that in fact the statements attributed to then candidate Trump and to his political advisers and most recently Mr. Giuliani,&quot; Clifton asked. &quot;Do you deny that those statements were made?&quot;

&nbsp;

CAMPAIGN PROMISE

Trump frequently promised during his 2016 election campaign to curb illegal immigration, especially from Mexico, and to crack down on Islamist violence. National security veterans, major US&nbsp;technology companies and law enforcement officials from more than a dozen states have backed a legal effort against the ban.

&quot;I actually can&#39;t believe that we&#39;re having to fight to protect the security, in a court system, to protect the security of our nation,&quot; Trump said at an event with sheriffs at the White House on Tuesday.

The legal fight over Trump&#39;s ban ultimately centers on how much power a president has to decide who cannot enter the United States and whether the order violates a provision of the US&nbsp;Constitution that prohibits laws favoring one religion over another, along with relevant discrimination laws.

The appeals court is only looking, however, at whether the Seattle court had the grounds to halt Trump&#39;s order while the case challenging the underlying order proceeds. &quot;To be clear, all that&#39;s at issue tonight in the hearing is an interim decision on whether the president&#39;s order is enforced or not, until the case is heard on the actual merits of the order,&quot; White House spokesman Sean Spicer said.

As many as&nbsp;137,000 people followed a live audio feed of the court proceedings&nbsp;online, and #9th circuit was trending on social media website Twitter. &nbsp;

Newly appointed Homeland Security chief John Kelly told a congressional panel on Tuesday he should have delayed implementing the measure in order to brief lawmakers.

(With inputs from Reuters)

Trump is pushing for what he originally called a 'Muslim ban', which overnight separated some American citizens from their families

President Donald Trump's order temporarily banning US entry to people from seven Muslim-majority countries came under intense scrutiny on Tuesday from a federal appeals court that questioned whether the ban unfairly targeted people over their religion. During a more than hour-long oral argument, a three-judge panel of the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals pressed a government lawyer whether the Trump administration's national security argument was backed by evidence that people from the seven countries posed a danger. Judge Richard Clifton, a George W Bush appointee, posed equally tough questions for an attorney representing Minnesota and Washington states, which are challenging the ban. Clifton asked if a Seattle judge's suspension of Trump's policy was "overbroad". The 9th Circuit said at the end of the session it would issue a ruling as soon as possible. Earlier on Tuesday, the court said it would likely rule this week but would not issue a same-day ruling. The matter will ultimately likely go to the US Supreme Court. Trump's January 27 order barred travelers from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen from entering for 90 days and all refugees for 120 days, except refugees from Syria, whom he would ban indefinitely. Trump, who took office on January 20, has defended the measure, the most divisive act of his young presidency, as necessary for national security. The order sparked protests and chaos at US and overseas airports. Opponents also assailed it as discriminatory against Muslims in violation of the US Constitution and applicable laws. A federal judge in Seattle suspended the order last Friday and many travelers who had been waylaid by the ban quickly moved to travel to the United States while it was in limbo. August Flentje, representing the Trump administration as special counsel for the US Justice Department, told the appellate panel that "Congress has expressly authorised the president to suspend entry of categories of aliens" for national security reasons. "That’s what the president did here," Flentje said at the start of the oral argument conducted by telephone and live-streamed on the internet. TOUGH QUESTIONING When the 9th Circuit asked Flentje what evidence the executive order had used to connect the seven countries affected by the order with terrorism in the United States, Flentje said the "proceedings have been moving very fast," without giving specific examples. He said both Congress and the previous administration of Democrat Barack Obama had determined that those seven countries posed the greatest risk of terrorism and had in the past put stricter visa requirements on them. "I'm not sure I'm convincing the court," Flentje said at one point. Noah Purcell, solicitor general for the state of Washington, began his argument urging the court to serve "as a check on executive abuses". "The president is asking this court to abdicate that role here," Purcell said. "The court should decline that invitation." The judges pummeled both sides with questions. Clifton pushed both attorneys about whether there was evidence the ban was intended to discriminate against Muslims. "I don't think allegations cut it at this stage," Clifton told Purcell. Clifton later questioned Flentje after the attorney argued the Seattle judge had second-guessed Trump's order "based on some newspaper articles." The judge referred to recent televised statements by former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who advised Trump during his campaign and transition, that the president had asked him for advice about implementing a legal Muslim ban. This statement by Giuliani could become very problematic for the Trump administration in litigation over intent/pretext of executive order. pic.twitter.com/MrRuDFJGwD — JP SchnapperCasteras (@jpscasteras) January 29, 2017 × Shortly after the executive order was announced, Former New York mayor and top Trump ally Rudy Giuliani went on Fox News and explained the history of what Donald Trump himself, according to Giuliani, called a "Muslim ban". Trump asked how to make a Muslim ban legal, and Giuliani sent it to legal experts who determined they needed to reframe the ban. If the ban focused on "security", then it could be legal, according to Giuliani. "Do you deny that in fact the statements attributed to then candidate Trump and to his political advisers and most recently Mr. Giuliani," Clifton asked. "Do you deny that those statements were made?" CAMPAIGN PROMISE Trump frequently promised during his 2016 election campaign to curb illegal immigration, especially from Mexico, and to crack down on Islamist violence. National security veterans, major US technology companies and law enforcement officials from more than a dozen states have backed a legal effort against the ban. "I actually can't believe that we're having to fight to protect the security, in a court system, to protect the security of our nation," Trump said at an event with sheriffs at the White House on Tuesday. The legal fight over Trump's ban ultimately centers on how much power a president has to decide who cannot enter the United States and whether the order violates a provision of the US Constitution that prohibits laws favoring one religion over another, along with relevant discrimination laws. The appeals court is only looking, however, at whether the Seattle court had the grounds to halt Trump's order while the case challenging the underlying order proceeds. "To be clear, all that's at issue tonight in the hearing is an interim decision on whether the president's order is enforced or not, until the case is heard on the actual merits of the order," White House spokesman Sean Spicer said. As many as 137,000 people followed a live audio feed of the court proceedings online, and #9th circuit was trending on social media website Twitter. Newly appointed Homeland Security chief John Kelly told a congressional panel on Tuesday he should have delayed implementing the measure in order to brief lawmakers. (With inputs from Reuters)

Court hearing looms on Trump travel ban

US embassies could ask visa applicants for passwords to their own social media accounts in future background checks, Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly said on Tuesday.

Kelly said the move could come as part of the effort to toughen vetting of visitors to screen out people who could pose a security threat. He said it was one of the things under consideration, especially for visitors from seven Muslim-majority countries with very weak background screening of their own -- &nbsp;Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

&quot;We&#39;re looking at some enhanced or some additional screening,&quot; Kelly told a hearing of the House Homeland Security Committee. &quot;We may want to get on their social media, with passwords,&quot; he said.

&quot;It&#39;s very hard to truly vet these people in these countries, the seven countries... But if they come in, we want to say, what websites do they visit, and give us your passwords. So we can see what they do on the internet.&quot;

&quot;If they don&#39;t want to cooperate, then they don&#39;t come in&quot; to the United States, he said.

Kelly stressed that no decision had been made on this, but said tighter screening was definitely in the future, even if it means longer delays for awarding US visas to visitors.

&quot;These are the things we are thinking about,&quot; he said. &quot;But over there we can ask them for this kind of information and if they truly want to come to America, then they will cooperate. If not, next in line.&quot;

The seven countries were targeted in president Donald Trump&#39;s January 27 immigrant and refugee ban order, which has since been at least temporarily blocked under court order.

(AFP)

Homeland Security secretary John Kelly said this would apply especially for visitors from the seven Muslim-majority countries

US embassies could ask visa applicants for passwords to their own social media accounts in future background checks, Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly said on Tuesday. Kelly said the move could come as part of the effort to toughen vetting of visitors to screen out people who could pose a security threat. He said it was one of the things under consideration, especially for visitors from seven Muslim-majority countries with very weak background screening of their own -- Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. "We're looking at some enhanced or some additional screening," Kelly told a hearing of the House Homeland Security Committee. "We may want to get on their social media, with passwords," he said. "It's very hard to truly vet these people in these countries, the seven countries... But if they come in, we want to say, what websites do they visit, and give us your passwords. So we can see what they do on the internet." "If they don't want to cooperate, then they don't come in" to the United States, he said. Kelly stressed that no decision had been made on this, but said tighter screening was definitely in the future, even if it means longer delays for awarding US visas to visitors. "These are the things we are thinking about," he said. "But over there we can ask them for this kind of information and if they truly want to come to America, then they will cooperate. If not, next in line." The seven countries were targeted in president Donald Trump's January 27 immigrant and refugee ban order, which has since been at least temporarily blocked under court order. (AFP)

US could ask visa applicants for social media passwords in future

On the long and winding road to resettling as a refugee in the United States, the last eight days have brought their share of frustration, hope, relief and uncertainty.

After a federal judge late on Friday temporarily lifted the ban barring the entry of refugees for 120 days and Syrian refugees indefinitely, the US&nbsp;State Department said on Saturday that officials &quot;expect some refugees to arrive Monday&quot;.

Refugees do not usually enter on weekends, an official said, as the department hews to a strict set of rules on how their admissions are processed.

Other travellers from seven Muslim-majority countries affected by President Donald Trump&#39;s week-old curb on immigration can rework their flights after the judge&#39;s order, as long as they have valid visas.

Refugees fleeing war, hunger and persecution have less autonomy. Advocates working on their behalf urged the government to move quickly on admitting them.

International Refugee Assistance Project Director Becca Heller called for &quot;the instant resumption of the US&nbsp;Refugee Admissions Program to immediately take the most vulnerable refugees out of harm&#39;s way&quot;.

During the week of the ban, the government admitted 843 refugees -- but no Syrian refugees, government figures show. Officials previously told Reuters that they were &quot;in transit&quot; and had already been cleared for resettlement before the ban took effect.

The New York Times reported on Saturday that Lawrence Bartlett, the State Department&rsquo;s director of refugee resettlement, wrote in a department email that officials were working to rebook travel for refugees who had previously been scheduled to leave for the United States over a three-week period ending February 17.

A United Nations spokesman, Leonard Doyle, told the newspaper about 2,000 refugees were ready to travel.

For refugee families, they are trying to keep expectations in check and hope they do not end up back where they started.

Ayham Oubeid, a Syrian living in Cleveland, has been waiting for over a year for his brother George&#39;s family to come to the United States as refugees. His brother, who has health issues, is living in Dubai on a work visa that covers him, his six-year-old daughter and five-months pregnant wife.

George left his job and moved the family out of their apartment when he was told they would be resettled in the United States on February 13. But the family&#39;s plane tickets were cancelled when Trump announced the temporary ban. Without George&rsquo;s job, the family could lose the work visa and be sent back to Syria in the midst of its deadly civil war.

Upon hearing of the judge&#39;s ruling from Friday, Oubeid called George. He was careful not to be too hopeful, knowing the judge&#39;s order could be overturned.

&quot;I don&rsquo;t want to get excited. I don&rsquo;t want my brother to get excited. Because it was hard for him when he lost everything and was told he couldn&#39;t come,&quot; Oubeid said.

(Reuters)

Travellers affected by the immigration ban can rework their flights after the federal judge's order, as long as they have valid visas

On the long and winding road to resettling as a refugee in the United States, the last eight days have brought their share of frustration, hope, relief and uncertainty. After a federal judge late on Friday temporarily lifted the ban barring the entry of refugees for 120 days and Syrian refugees indefinitely, the US State Department said on Saturday that officials "expect some refugees to arrive Monday". Refugees do not usually enter on weekends, an official said, as the department hews to a strict set of rules on how their admissions are processed. Other travellers from seven Muslim-majority countries affected by President Donald Trump's week-old curb on immigration can rework their flights after the judge's order, as long as they have valid visas. Refugees fleeing war, hunger and persecution have less autonomy. Advocates working on their behalf urged the government to move quickly on admitting them. International Refugee Assistance Project Director Becca Heller called for "the instant resumption of the US Refugee Admissions Program to immediately take the most vulnerable refugees out of harm's way". During the week of the ban, the government admitted 843 refugees -- but no Syrian refugees, government figures show. Officials previously told Reuters that they were "in transit" and had already been cleared for resettlement before the ban took effect. The New York Times reported on Saturday that Lawrence Bartlett, the State Department’s director of refugee resettlement, wrote in a department email that officials were working to rebook travel for refugees who had previously been scheduled to leave for the United States over a three-week period ending February 17. A United Nations spokesman, Leonard Doyle, told the newspaper about 2,000 refugees were ready to travel. For refugee families, they are trying to keep expectations in check and hope they do not end up back where they started. Ayham Oubeid, a Syrian living in Cleveland, has been waiting for over a year for his brother George's family to come to the United States as refugees. His brother, who has health issues, is living in Dubai on a work visa that covers him, his six-year-old daughter and five-months pregnant wife. George left his job and moved the family out of their apartment when he was told they would be resettled in the United States on February 13. But the family's plane tickets were cancelled when Trump announced the temporary ban. Without George’s job, the family could lose the work visa and be sent back to Syria in the midst of its deadly civil war. Upon hearing of the judge's ruling from Friday, Oubeid called George. He was careful not to be too hopeful, knowing the judge's order could be overturned. "I don’t want to get excited. I don’t want my brother to get excited. Because it was hard for him when he lost everything and was told he couldn't come," Oubeid said. (Reuters)

US expects to resume refugee admissions on Monday

A US appeal court has denied an emergency appeal from the US Department of Justice to restore a travel order from President Donald Trump barring citizens from seven mainly Muslim countries and temporarily banning refugees.

&quot;Appellants&#39; request for an immediate administrative stay pending full consideration of the emergency motion for a stay pending appeal is denied,&quot; the ruling by the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said.

It said a reply from the Department in support of the emergency appeal was due on Monday.&nbsp;The Department had filed the appeal a day after a federal judge in Seattle ordered Trump&#39;s travel ban to be lifted. The president&#39;s January 27 order had barred admission of citizens from the seven nations for 90 days.

Earlier, Donald Trump&#39;s administration had on Saturday appealed a federal judge&#39;s order that blocked the US president&#39;s ban on travellers from seven Muslim-majority nations.

The Justice Department appeal came a&nbsp;day after a US district judge filed a nationwide order halting the ban&#39;s implementation. Since then, the Department of Homeland Security has reverted to standard, previous procedure in admitting people from the affected countries.

The judge&#39;s order represents a major challenge to the Trump administration. The judge declined to stay the order, suggesting that travel restrictions could be lifted immediately.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false"><centre>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
The judge opens up our country to potential terrorists and others that do not have our best interests at heart. Bad people are very happy!
&mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/828042506851934209">February 5, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script><centre></centre></centre></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

Trump&nbsp;dismissed the ruling as &quot;ridiculous&quot; and has&nbsp;vowed to get it overturned.&nbsp;Some 60,000 visas have been revoked since Trump&#39;s executive order was issued.

&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
The opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law-enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned!
&mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/827867311054974976">February 4, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

(WION with agency inputs)

A US appeal court has denied an emergency appeal from the US Department of Justice to restore a travel ban order against seven countries

A US appeal court has denied an emergency appeal from the US Department of Justice to restore a travel order from President Donald Trump barring citizens from seven mainly Muslim countries and temporarily banning refugees. "Appellants' request for an immediate administrative stay pending full consideration of the emergency motion for a stay pending appeal is denied," the ruling by the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said. It said a reply from the Department in support of the emergency appeal was due on Monday. The Department had filed the appeal a day after a federal judge in Seattle ordered Trump's travel ban to be lifted. The president's January 27 order had barred admission of citizens from the seven nations for 90 days. Earlier, Donald Trump's administration had on Saturday appealed a federal judge's order that blocked the US president's ban on travellers from seven Muslim-majority nations. The Justice Department appeal came a day after a US district judge filed a nationwide order halting the ban's implementation. Since then, the Department of Homeland Security has reverted to standard, previous procedure in admitting people from the affected countries. The judge's order represents a major challenge to the Trump administration. The judge declined to stay the order, suggesting that travel restrictions could be lifted immediately. The judge opens up our country to potential terrorists and others that do not have our best interests at heart. Bad people are very happy! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 5, 2017 × Trump dismissed the ruling as "ridiculous" and has vowed to get it overturned. Some 60,000 visas have been revoked since Trump's executive order was issued. The opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law-enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 4, 2017 × (WION with agency inputs)

US court rejects Trump govt's appeal against travel ban ruling

A federal judge in Seattle on Friday granted a nationwide temporary restraining order blocking US&nbsp;President Donald Trump&#39;s recent action barring nationals from seven countries from entering the United States.

The judge&#39;s order represents a major challenge to the Trump administration, which is expected to immediately appeal. The judge declined to stay the order, suggesting that travel restrictions could be lifted immediately.

The challenge was brought by the state of Washington and later joined by the state of Minnesota. The Seattle judge ruled that the states have legal standing to sue, which could help Democratic attorneys general take on Trump in court on issues beyond immigration.

&quot;It&#39;s a wonderful day for the rule of law in this country,&quot; said Washington state solicitor general Noah Purcell.

The decision came on a day that attorneys from four states were in courts challenging Trump&#39;s executive order. Trump&#39;s administration justified the action on national security grounds, but opponents labelled it an unconstitutional order targeting people based on religious beliefs.

Earlier on Friday, a federal judge in Boston on Friday declined to extend a temporary restraining order that allowed some immigrants into the United States from certain countries despite being barred by US&nbsp;President Donald Trump&#39;s recent executive order.

Also on Friday in Virginia, a federal judge ordered the White House to provide a list of all people stopped from entering the United States by the travel ban.

The State Department said on Friday that fewer than 60,000 visas previously issued to citizens of Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen had been invalidated as a result of the order. That disclosure followed media reports that government lawyers were citing a figure of 100,000.

US&nbsp;District Judge Leonie Brinkema in Alexandria, Virginia ordered the federal government to give the state a list by Thursday of &quot;all persons who have been denied entry to or removed from the United States&quot;.

The state of Hawaii on Friday joined the challenge to the order, filing a lawsuit alleging that the order is unconstitutional and asking the court to block the order across the country.

The new Republican president&#39;s order signed on January 27 triggered chaos at US&nbsp;airports last weekend. Some travellers abroad were turned back from flights into the United States, crowds of hundreds of people packed into arrival areas to protest and legal objections were filed across the country.

The order also temporarily stopped the entry of all refugees into the country and indefinitely halted the settlement of Syrian refugees.

On Friday the Department of Homeland Security issued additional clarification of the order, stating that there were no plans to extend it beyond the seven countries. The DHS also reiterated that the ban did not apply to permanent residents, or green card holders, and some others, such as those who have helped the US&nbsp;military.

In the Boston case, US&nbsp;District Judge Nathan Gorton denied the request, after expressing skepticism during oral arguments about a civil rights group&#39;s claim that Trump&#39;s order represented religious discrimination.

(Reuters)

The judge declined to stay the order, suggesting that travel restrictions could be lifted immediately

A federal judge in Seattle on Friday granted a nationwide temporary restraining order blocking US President Donald Trump's recent action barring nationals from seven countries from entering the United States. The judge's order represents a major challenge to the Trump administration, which is expected to immediately appeal. The judge declined to stay the order, suggesting that travel restrictions could be lifted immediately. The challenge was brought by the state of Washington and later joined by the state of Minnesota. The Seattle judge ruled that the states have legal standing to sue, which could help Democratic attorneys general take on Trump in court on issues beyond immigration. "It's a wonderful day for the rule of law in this country," said Washington state solicitor general Noah Purcell. The decision came on a day that attorneys from four states were in courts challenging Trump's executive order. Trump's administration justified the action on national security grounds, but opponents labelled it an unconstitutional order targeting people based on religious beliefs. Earlier on Friday, a federal judge in Boston on Friday declined to extend a temporary restraining order that allowed some immigrants into the United States from certain countries despite being barred by US President Donald Trump's recent executive order. Also on Friday in Virginia, a federal judge ordered the White House to provide a list of all people stopped from entering the United States by the travel ban. The State Department said on Friday that fewer than 60,000 visas previously issued to citizens of Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen had been invalidated as a result of the order. That disclosure followed media reports that government lawyers were citing a figure of 100,000. US District Judge Leonie Brinkema in Alexandria, Virginia ordered the federal government to give the state a list by Thursday of "all persons who have been denied entry to or removed from the United States". The state of Hawaii on Friday joined the challenge to the order, filing a lawsuit alleging that the order is unconstitutional and asking the court to block the order across the country. The new Republican president's order signed on January 27 triggered chaos at US airports last weekend. Some travellers abroad were turned back from flights into the United States, crowds of hundreds of people packed into arrival areas to protest and legal objections were filed across the country. The order also temporarily stopped the entry of all refugees into the country and indefinitely halted the settlement of Syrian refugees. On Friday the Department of Homeland Security issued additional clarification of the order, stating that there were no plans to extend it beyond the seven countries. The DHS also reiterated that the ban did not apply to permanent residents, or green card holders, and some others, such as those who have helped the US military. In the Boston case, US District Judge Nathan Gorton denied the request, after expressing skepticism during oral arguments about a civil rights group's claim that Trump's order represented religious discrimination. (Reuters)

Federal judge in Seattle temporarily halts Trump's immigration order

The US acting attorney general, Sally Yates, said on Monday&nbsp;the Justice Department would not defend Trump&#39;s&nbsp;immigration&nbsp;ban&nbsp;targeting seven Muslim-majority nations because she was not convinced they were lawful.

&quot;My responsibility is to ensure that the position of the Department of Justice is not only legally defensible, but is informed by our best view of what the law is,&quot; she wrote in a letter to employees, according to CNN.

&quot;I am responsible for ensuring that the positions we take in court remain consistent with this institution&#39;s solemn obligation to always seek justice and stand for what is right.&quot;

Trump&#39;s directive on Friday put a 120-day hold on allowing refugees into the country, an indefinite ban on refugees from Syria and a 90-day bar on citizens from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

He has argued tougher vetting of immigrants is needed to protect America from terror attacks, but critics complain that his order unfairly singles out Muslims and defiles America&#39;s historic reputation as a welcoming place for immigrants.

&quot;At present, I am not convinced that the defence of the executive order is consistent with these responsibilities nor am I convinced that the executive order is lawful,&quot; she wrote.&nbsp;

The White House dismissed her comments as rhetoric and said Trump acted within his presidential powers.

&quot;I think that&#39;s a further demonstration of how politicised our legal system has become,&quot; said Stephen Miller, a policy adviser to Trump who has been <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/12/trumps-newest-senior-adviser-seen-ally-white-nationalists">praised by white nationalists</a> and is seen as an ally, in an interview on MSNBC.

Yates, who was appointed by former Democratic President Barack Obama, is days away from being replaced by Trump&#39;s pick for the top spot at the Justice Department, Jeff Sessions, who is awaiting Senate confirmation.

(WION with inputs from agencies)

Sally Yates wrote she was not 'convinced' the order was lawful. The administration dismissed the attorney general's stance as 'rhetoric'

The US acting attorney general, Sally Yates, said on Monday the Justice Department would not defend Trump's immigration ban targeting seven Muslim-majority nations because she was not convinced they were lawful. "My responsibility is to ensure that the position of the Department of Justice is not only legally defensible, but is informed by our best view of what the law is," she wrote in a letter to employees, according to CNN. "I am responsible for ensuring that the positions we take in court remain consistent with this institution's solemn obligation to always seek justice and stand for what is right." Trump's directive on Friday put a 120-day hold on allowing refugees into the country, an indefinite ban on refugees from Syria and a 90-day bar on citizens from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. He has argued tougher vetting of immigrants is needed to protect America from terror attacks, but critics complain that his order unfairly singles out Muslims and defiles America's historic reputation as a welcoming place for immigrants. "At present, I am not convinced that the defence of the executive order is consistent with these responsibilities nor am I convinced that the executive order is lawful," she wrote. The White House dismissed her comments as rhetoric and said Trump acted within his presidential powers. "I think that's a further demonstration of how politicised our legal system has become," said Stephen Miller, a policy adviser to Trump who has been praised by white nationalists and is seen as an ally, in an interview on MSNBC. Yates, who was appointed by former Democratic President Barack Obama, is days away from being replaced by Trump's pick for the top spot at the Justice Department, Jeff Sessions, who is awaiting Senate confirmation. (WION with inputs from agencies)

US acting attorney general defies Trump, tells Justice Department not to defend immigration ban

US&nbsp;President Donald Trump on Monday fired&nbsp;acting attorney general&nbsp;Sally Yates after she defied him by saying the Justice Department would not defend his new travel restrictions targeting seven Muslim-majority nations.

The White House said on Twitter that Dana Boente, US&nbsp;attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, would replace Yates, an appointee of former Democratic President Barack Obama, as acting US&nbsp;attorney general.

&quot;The acting attorney general, Sally Yates, has betrayed the Department of Justice by refusing to enforce a legal order designed to protect the citizens of the United States,&quot; the White House said in a statement.

&quot;President Trump relieved Ms Yates of her duties and subsequently named Dana Boente, US attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, to serve as acting attorney general until Senator Jeff Sessions is finally confirmed by the Senate.&quot;

&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Statement on the Appointment of Dana Boente as Acting Attorney General: <a href="https://t.co/fkAWOmnrsP">https://t.co/fkAWOmnrsP</a>
&mdash; President Trump (@POTUS) <a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/826259197700481028">January 31, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

&nbsp;

Yates&nbsp;said on Monday&nbsp;the Justice Department would not defend Trump&#39;s&nbsp;immigration&nbsp;ban&nbsp;targeting seven Muslim-majority nations because she was not convinced they were lawful.

She said she did not believe defending the order would be &quot;consistent with this institution&#39;s solemn obligation to always seek justice and stand for what is right&quot;.

Trump has argued tougher vetting of immigrants is needed to protect America from terror attacks but critics complain that his order unfairly singles out Muslims and defiles America&#39;s historic reputation as a welcoming place for immigrants.

Yates was days away from being replaced by Trump&#39;s pick for the top spot at the Justice Department, Republican Senator Jeff Sessions, who is awaiting Senate confirmation.

The White House dismissed her comments as rhetoric and said Trump acted within his presidential powers.

&quot;I think that&#39;s a further demonstration of how politicized our legal system has become,&quot; said Stephen Miller, a policy adviser to Trump, in an interview on MSNBC.

(WION with inputs from agencies)

The White House suddenly replaced one of the highest legal professionals in the country with one who will do Trump's bidding

US President Donald Trump on Monday fired acting attorney general Sally Yates after she defied him by saying the Justice Department would not defend his new travel restrictions targeting seven Muslim-majority nations. The White House said on Twitter that Dana Boente, US attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, would replace Yates, an appointee of former Democratic President Barack Obama, as acting US attorney general. "The acting attorney general, Sally Yates, has betrayed the Department of Justice by refusing to enforce a legal order designed to protect the citizens of the United States," the White House said in a statement. "President Trump relieved Ms Yates of her duties and subsequently named Dana Boente, US attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, to serve as acting attorney general until Senator Jeff Sessions is finally confirmed by the Senate." Statement on the Appointment of Dana Boente as Acting Attorney General: https://t.co/fkAWOmnrsP — President Trump (@POTUS) January 31, 2017 × Yates said on Monday the Justice Department would not defend Trump's immigration ban targeting seven Muslim-majority nations because she was not convinced they were lawful. She said she did not believe defending the order would be "consistent with this institution's solemn obligation to always seek justice and stand for what is right". Trump has argued tougher vetting of immigrants is needed to protect America from terror attacks but critics complain that his order unfairly singles out Muslims and defiles America's historic reputation as a welcoming place for immigrants. Yates was days away from being replaced by Trump's pick for the top spot at the Justice Department, Republican Senator Jeff Sessions, who is awaiting Senate confirmation. The White House dismissed her comments as rhetoric and said Trump acted within his presidential powers. "I think that's a further demonstration of how politicized our legal system has become," said Stephen Miller, a policy adviser to Trump, in an interview on MSNBC. (WION with inputs from agencies)

Trump fires acting attorney general who called immigration ban unlawful

Fresh protests are expected at US airports Sunday, following President Donald Trump&#39;s order to suspend refugee arrivals and impose tough controls on travellers from seven mostly Muslim countries.

The visa-restricted countries are Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

Here are some of the cases known about so far, of people stopped either before boarding flights to the United States or on arrival there.

Iran

Two travel agencies told AFP they had been instructed by Etihad Airways, Emirates and Turkish Airlines not to sell US tickets or allow Iranians holding American visas to board US-bound flights.

An Iranian woman blocked from boarding at Tehran airport on Sunday said she had waited 14 years for her green card, which was recently approved only for her hopes to be dashed.

&quot;Even during the hostage crisis at the US embassy (in 1980), the US government didn&#39;t issue such an order. They say the US is the cradle of liberty. I don&#39;t see freedom in that country,&quot; she said, asking not to be named.

&quot;I have sold everything, my house, my furniture. I am totally ruined.&quot;

Hamaseh Tayari, an Iranian postgraduate veterinary student, was due to fly back to university in Glasgow, Scotland from a holiday in Costa Rica, via a connecting flight in New York.

But she was refused boarding. &quot;It&#39;s a crazy thing that I really didn&#39;t expect to happen to me,&quot; she told the BBC in an interview.

She and her boyfriend had to pay for a new flight from San Jose to Madrid, costing them almost &pound;2,600 ($3,260).

Egypt

An Iraqi family was barred from flying from Cairo to New York on Saturday. Egyptian officials said the family had visas and were in transit when they were prevented from boarding the EgyptAir plane to New York&#39;s JFK airport.

Fuad Sharef, 51, his wife and three children were instead forced to board a flight back to Arbil in Iraq&#39;s autonomous region of Kurdistan, he told AFP.

&quot;I had sold my house, my car, my furniture. I resigned from work and so did my wife. I took my children out of school,&quot; said Sharef of the family&#39;s preparations to resettle in Nashville, Tennessee, under a special immigrant visa.

&quot;Donald Trump destroyed my life. My family&#39;s life. I used to think America was a state of institutions but it&#39;s as though it&#39;s a dictatorship,&quot; he said.

Austria

At least three Iranian nationals were stopped at Vienna airport on Saturday as they sought to travel to the US, a spokesman for Austrian Airlines said.

The trio, an elderly couple and a young woman who all came from the central city of Isfahan, had valid US visas, Peter Thier told the Austria Press Agency.

The couple remained stranded in the Austrian capital for the night while the woman had flown back to Iran, he added.

Vienna is an important transit hub for Iranians travelling to the US so there could be more cases.

United States

The New York Times reported that authorities detained two Iraqi refugees who landed at John F. Kennedy airport late Friday, hours after Trump signed the tough new measures.

The American Civil Liberties Union and other advocacy groups filed a legal challenge to Trump&#39;s order. Lawyers representing the pair also filed a court appeal for their release, saying they were being unlawfully detained.

Shortly after midday Saturday one of them was released, the newspaper said, naming him as Hameed Khalid Darweesh, an interpreter who worked on behalf of the US government in Iraq.

The paper said he cried as he spoke to reporters, miming being handcuffed behind his back. &quot;What I do for this country? They put the cuffs on,&quot; it quoted him as saying.

The other Iraqi remained in custody.

The Netherlands

Dutch flag carrier KLM said it had stopped seven passengers from boarding its flights, five of whom it had been able to contact before departure.

The identities of the seven, their countries of origin and destinations were not given.&nbsp;

&quot;We would have liked to have had them fly with us, but it would not have made much sense because they would have been denied entry&quot; to the United States, KLM spokesman Manel Vrijenhoek told AFP.

France

Air France said Sunday it had refused to embark around 15 people who were nationals of the seven predominantly Muslim countries affected by Trump&#39;s decree coming into force.

&quot;Nobody is blocked in Paris and we have made the necessary arrangements to redirect them to their point of origin,&quot; a spokesman said.

(AFP)

An Iranian woman blocked from boarding at Tehran airport on Sunday said she had waited 14 years for her green card

Fresh protests are expected at US airports Sunday, following President Donald Trump's order to suspend refugee arrivals and impose tough controls on travellers from seven mostly Muslim countries. The visa-restricted countries are Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. Here are some of the cases known about so far, of people stopped either before boarding flights to the United States or on arrival there. Iran Two travel agencies told AFP they had been instructed by Etihad Airways, Emirates and Turkish Airlines not to sell US tickets or allow Iranians holding American visas to board US-bound flights. An Iranian woman blocked from boarding at Tehran airport on Sunday said she had waited 14 years for her green card, which was recently approved only for her hopes to be dashed. "Even during the hostage crisis at the US embassy (in 1980), the US government didn't issue such an order. They say the US is the cradle of liberty. I don't see freedom in that country," she said, asking not to be named. "I have sold everything, my house, my furniture. I am totally ruined." Hamaseh Tayari, an Iranian postgraduate veterinary student, was due to fly back to university in Glasgow, Scotland from a holiday in Costa Rica, via a connecting flight in New York. But she was refused boarding. "It's a crazy thing that I really didn't expect to happen to me," she told the BBC in an interview. She and her boyfriend had to pay for a new flight from San Jose to Madrid, costing them almost £2,600 ($3,260). Egypt An Iraqi family was barred from flying from Cairo to New York on Saturday. Egyptian officials said the family had visas and were in transit when they were prevented from boarding the EgyptAir plane to New York's JFK airport. Fuad Sharef, 51, his wife and three children were instead forced to board a flight back to Arbil in Iraq's autonomous region of Kurdistan, he told AFP. "I had sold my house, my car, my furniture. I resigned from work and so did my wife. I took my children out of school," said Sharef of the family's preparations to resettle in Nashville, Tennessee, under a special immigrant visa. "Donald Trump destroyed my life. My family's life. I used to think America was a state of institutions but it's as though it's a dictatorship," he said. Austria At least three Iranian nationals were stopped at Vienna airport on Saturday as they sought to travel to the US, a spokesman for Austrian Airlines said. The trio, an elderly couple and a young woman who all came from the central city of Isfahan, had valid US visas, Peter Thier told the Austria Press Agency. The couple remained stranded in the Austrian capital for the night while the woman had flown back to Iran, he added. Vienna is an important transit hub for Iranians travelling to the US so there could be more cases. United States The New York Times reported that authorities detained two Iraqi refugees who landed at John F. Kennedy airport late Friday, hours after Trump signed the tough new measures. The American Civil Liberties Union and other advocacy groups filed a legal challenge to Trump's order. Lawyers representing the pair also filed a court appeal for their release, saying they were being unlawfully detained. Shortly after midday Saturday one of them was released, the newspaper said, naming him as Hameed Khalid Darweesh, an interpreter who worked on behalf of the US government in Iraq. The paper said he cried as he spoke to reporters, miming being handcuffed behind his back. "What I do for this country? They put the cuffs on," it quoted him as saying. The other Iraqi remained in custody. The Netherlands Dutch flag carrier KLM said it had stopped seven passengers from boarding its flights, five of whom it had been able to contact before departure. The identities of the seven, their countries of origin and destinations were not given. "We would have liked to have had them fly with us, but it would not have made much sense because they would have been denied entry" to the United States, KLM spokesman Manel Vrijenhoek told AFP. France Air France said Sunday it had refused to embark around 15 people who were nationals of the seven predominantly Muslim countries affected by Trump's decree coming into force. "Nobody is blocked in Paris and we have made the necessary arrangements to redirect them to their point of origin," a spokesman said. (AFP)

Travellers so far blocked by Trump's immigration ban