Immigration Pause Hits Black & Brown Nations
By Darius Spearman (africanelements)
Support African Elements at patreon.com/africanelements and hear recent news in a single playlist. Additionally, you can gain early access to ad-free video content.
The Trump administration announced an "immigration pause" in December 2025, halting all immigration applications from 19 nations, many of which are home to predominantly Black and Brown populations (americanimmigrationcouncil.org). This action is a significant escalation of previous policies often called "travel bans." It has once again brought the debate over U.S. immigration policy to the forefront, particularly its impact on communities of color worldwide. To understand today's headlines, it is essential to look at the history that set the stage for this moment.
This new policy was triggered by a shooting in Washington D.C., allegedly committed by an Afghan national who entered the United States in 2021 (rescue.org). The administration cited national security and failures in vetting as the main reasons for the sweeping new measures. However, the policy goes far beyond restricting travel. It is an unprecedented ban on all immigration applications, including those for spouses and adopted children of U.S. citizens, green cards, student visas, and even naturalization (aila.org). This move represents a continuation of policies that have historically targeted African and Muslim-majority countries.
The roots of these restrictions trace back to the 2016 presidential campaign promise of a "total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States" (time.com). This campaign rhetoric quickly turned into policy after the inauguration. The first major action was Executive Order 13769, issued on January 27, 2017 (wikipedia.org). Known as "Muslim Ban 1.0," it blocked entry for people from seven Muslim-majority nations: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. This order sparked massive protests and was quickly challenged and blocked in federal court.
In response to the legal fights, the administration issued a revised order, Executive Order 13780, in March 2017 (wikipedia.org). This version removed Iraq from the list but kept restrictions on the other six countries. Later that year, Presidential Proclamation 9645 replaced the previous orders, adding countries like North Korea and Venezuela but also targeting Chad, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen (wikipedia.org). This third version was ultimately upheld by the Supreme Court in 2018. Finally, in January 2020, Proclamation 9983 expanded the ban to include six more countries, including the African nations of Eritrea, Nigeria, Sudan, and Tanzania (fragomen.com). Each step in this process widened the net, consistently affecting nations with large Black and Brown populations.
These immigration restrictions are built upon the authority granted to the President under Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (immigrationhistory.org). This law gives the President broad power to suspend the entry of any non-citizens if their entry is deemed "detrimental to the interests of the United States." Critics have long argued that this authority has been used to enact discriminatory policies that would otherwise be illegal. The legal instruments for these actions are typically Executive Orders or Presidential Proclamations.
An Executive Order is a directive from the President that manages the operations of the federal government and has the force of law (ebsco.com). Similarly, a Presidential Proclamation is a public statement that can also carry legal weight when it announces a policy based on existing law (ebsco.com). Both are issued unilaterally by the President and do not require congressional approval, unlike legislation passed by Congress (ebsco.com). On January 20, 2021, President Joseph Biden used an executive order to reverse the Trump-era travel bans, calling them a "stain on our national conscience" (hrw.org). However, the re-emergence of these policies shows how presidential power can dramatically shift immigration rules from one administration to the next.
100%
50%
0%
69.9%
Immigrant Visas
84.7%
Non-Immigrant Visas
Visa issuance to six of the most affected countries dropped dramatically between fiscal years 2016 and 2019 (americanimmigrationcouncil.org).
The previous travel bans had a devastating impact on families and communities, both in the United States and abroad. Data shows that between fiscal years 2016 and 2019, immigrant visas issued to people from Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen fell by nearly 70% (americanimmigrationcouncil.org). Non-immigrant visas for those same countries dropped by almost 85% during that period (americanimmigrationcouncil.org). Families were separated, students were unable to attend American universities, and professionals were blocked from career opportunities.
A study from Georgetown University highlighted the sharp decline in visas for specific nationalities between December 2015 and September 2019 (americanimmigrationcouncil.org). The study noted a 79% decrease for Iranians, a 74% drop for Somalis, and a 66% fall for Yemenis (americanimmigrationcouncil.org). These numbers represent thousands of individual stories of hardship. For the African diaspora, the inclusion of countries like Somalia, Sudan, Libya, Nigeria, and Eritrea meant that family reunification, cultural exchange, and educational pursuits were severely disrupted. These policies created immense uncertainty and pain for communities with deep ties to these nations.
The December 2025 "immigration pause" is far more extensive than previous travel bans. While a travel ban typically restricts physical entry into the country, an immigration pause can be a broader action that stops the government from processing new applications or issuing visas (publicseminar.org). This new policy does exactly that, creating a complete halt on nearly all forms of immigration from 19 countries. The nations facing full restrictions include Afghanistan, Chad, Eritrea, Haiti, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen, while others like Burundi, Sierra Leone, and Togo face partial restrictions (americanimmigrationcouncil.org).
A particularly concerning element is the "adjudicative hold" placed on all asylum applications, regardless of nationality (aila.org). In legal terms, an adjudicative hold means that decisions on cases are temporarily suspended or postponed (wikipedia.org). For asylum seekers fleeing persecution, this creates an indefinite limbo, delaying their ability to find safety and rebuild their lives. Furthermore, the policy directs a review of "approved benefit requests" for immigrants from "high-risk countries" who entered after January 20, 2021. This could potentially lead to the revocation of green cards or other legal statuses, spreading fear among those already living in the U.S. (immpolicytracking.org).
$30.5B
Decrease in U.S. GDP
182,000
Jobs Lost
An analysis projected significant economic damage from an expanded ban in its first year alone (americanimmigrationcouncil.org).
Beyond the humanitarian crisis, the immigration pause is expected to cause significant economic damage. A report from the American Immigration Council detailed the potential consequences of such a policy (americanimmigrationcouncil.org). In 2022 alone, nearly 300,000 individuals arrived from the 19 countries now targeted by the pause. These immigrants contributed up to $715.6 million in taxes and had an employment rate of 82%, often filling critical labor shortages in construction, manufacturing, and hospitality (americanimmigrationcouncil.org).
The economic impact of the December 2025 pause could be severe. The report projected that an expanded ban could lead to a $30.5 billion decrease in U.S. GDP and the loss of 182,000 jobs within the first year (americanimmigrationcouncil.org). In 2023, approximately 4.3 million immigrants from the affected countries lived in the United States, making up 9% of the total immigrant population (americanimmigrationcouncil.org). This figure includes 2.4 million naturalized citizens whose families and communities will be directly harmed by the pause. These numbers show that restricting immigration affects the entire U.S. economy, not just the individuals who are barred from entry.
82%
Filling Critical Jobs
In 2022, nearly 300,000 arrivals from the 19 affected countries had an 82% employment rate (americanimmigrationcouncil.org).
The justification for the December 2025 pause—an act by a single individual—stands in stark contrast to its sweeping scope, which affects 19 different nations. This disproportionate response raises serious questions about the true motivations behind the policy. Many of the targeted countries, such as Haiti, Somalia, Nigeria, Eritrea, and Sudan, have large Black populations. The continued focus on African, Caribbean, and Muslim-majority nations suggests a pattern of targeting based on race and religion rather than specific security threats.
The administration's directive to review the legal status of immigrants already in the U.S. from "high-risk countries of concern" further fuels these concerns (immpolicytracking.org). The criteria for designating a country as "high-risk" often include broad factors like information-sharing deficiencies, which can be used to justify targeting nearly any developing nation (immpolicytracking.org). This creates a climate of fear, where even naturalized citizens may feel their status is precarious. The policy does not just block new arrivals; it also threatens the stability of established communities of color within the United States, continuing a long and troubled history of discriminatory immigration practices.
Darius Spearman is a professor of Black Studies at San Diego City College, where he has been teaching for over 20 years. He is the founder of African Elements, a media platform dedicated to providing educational resources on the history and culture of the African diaspora. Through his work, Spearman aims to empower and educate by bringing historical context to contemporary issues affecting the Black community.
