Update: What Trump’s executive orders mean for Artist Mobility to the US
Dear colleagues—
Many of you have expressed concern about how the new Trump administration’s policy initiatives might affect the process of bringing international artists into the US. The White House has issued a dizzying array of executive orders; we know that some will be tied up in the courts, and others are unclear and will require the government to explain how they would be enacted and enforced. As such, there is much we don’t know about how the orders will impact our sector. Nevertheless, we want to update you about what we do know and also what we do not know
Executive Order: “Protecting the American People Against Invasion”
This bellicose and cynical order purports to facilitate the deportation of criminals, but also calls for strict enforcement of our nation’s less humane immigration laws and interior immigration status and employment verification checks. It poses no immediate effect on most artists or the cultural sector. However, one provision suggests that the US may retaliate against countries that refuse to repatriate deported foreign nationals, potentially paving the way for the US to restrict visas for nationals from certain nations, likely including India, China, Russia, and Brazil.
Executive Order: “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship”
This order is notable in its attacks on various avenues to citizenship, all destined for court battles. Though not particularly important to the cultural sector, per se, it’s worth mentioning that even if this withstands legal challenges, the provisions will not be retroactive.
Executive Order: “Protecting the United States from Foreign Terrorists and other National Security and Public Safety Threats”
This is the one to watch. Effective immediately, it could provide grounds for consular officers to apply stricter scrutiny to visa applicants—especially those from Global Majority nations. It could also be used by Customs and Border Protection officers to subjectively deny certain individuals entry to the US. The most chilling thing about this order is how broadly it suggests action against…
foreign nationals who have undermined or seek to undermine the fundamental constitutional rights of the American people, including, but not limited to, our Citizens’ rights to freedom of speech and the free exercise of religion protected by the First Amendment, who preach or call for sectarian violence, the overthrow or replacement of the culture on which our constitutional Republic stands, or who provide aid, advocacy, or support for foreign terrorists.
Depending on how those terms are defined, this order could be used to deny entry to the US based on alarmingly expansive, politicized, and subjective criteria. This could certainly be used to exclude artists that are perceived to be “dangerous.”
Executive Order: “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government”
This phenomenally cruel order’s callow double-speak does not deserve summary. What we will say is while it could affect immigration, it will require significant clarification and will be subject to substantial litigation before we have any idea how it might impact trans, nonbinary, and intersex travelers. In the short term, however, we might find that it has emboldened certain individual officers to subject people they think may not be cisgender to additional scrutiny and disrespect.
The Shutting Down of the CBP One App
This was widely reported in the media, but what actually happened is that a specific functionality of this app was removed. The functionality allowed undocumented immigrants to submit documentation and schedule asylum appointments online. While this move creates bureaucratic dysfunction in the place of actual public policy, this is unlikely to significantly affect the cultural sector.
What did not happen
The last Trump administration kicked off with the anti-Muslim travel ban. Bans will come, but they are not here yet. Also, there has been no clear return to the strict and inhumane “public charge rule” that was a much-contested tool the first Trump administration used to target certain immigrants and nonimmigrants it thought might be likely to rely on public support resources.
Please feel free to contact us with specific concerns or questions. Otherwise, stay tuned.
All the best,
Matthew Covey