In a sweeping move to shore up national security, President Trump announced a new travel ban on Wednesday targeting 12 countries with full entry restrictions and seven others with limited visa suspensions. The order follows the shocking Boulder terror attack, where Egyptian national Mohamad Soliman—who overstayed a visa under Biden—used Molotov cocktails to torch elderly Jewish women during a pro-Israel gathering.

Trump laid out his case in a White House video, arguing that the United States cannot reliably vet travelers from countries with rampant terrorism or a history of ignoring U.S. immigration laws. He emphasized that this isn’t about prejudice—it’s about protecting Americans.

The 12 countries now facing total entry bans are: Afghanistan, Burma, Chad, Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen. Trump’s proclamation explained that many of these nations either refuse to repatriate their nationals, have severe visa overstay issues, or lack the infrastructure for effective background checks.

Seven other countries—Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela—will face partial restrictions, with entry suspended under certain visa categories but not a total ban.

Predictably, the left erupted. Social media was flooded with cries of “xenophobia,” “racism,” and—you guessed it—“Muslim ban.” But as always, the reality doesn’t match the hysteria.

First, as Trump critics seem to forget, Muslim isn’t a race. Second, not all countries on the list are Muslim-majority. Third, the criteria here are plainly security-based—focused on non-compliance, poor vetting, and rampant visa abuse.

As Trump defenders were quick to point out, no one has a right to a U.S. visa. This isn’t about banning people based on identity—it’s about stopping potential terrorists from exploiting weak links in the immigration system. And it’s not just theoretical. Soliman was approved for a U.S. work permit in 2023—despite already overstaying a tourist visa—before launching a firebomb attack in Colorado that left multiple people injured, including an elderly woman now in critical condition.

Critics insist the ban will damage America’s global reputation. Trump supporters fire back: we don’t need approval from countries like Iran or Somalia to enforce basic border security. If anything, failing to act after a wave of visa-based threats would be the real scandal.

Some of the loudest opposition came from progressive lawmakers more concerned with the rights of foreign nationals than the safety of U.S. citizens. One congresswoman lamented the impact on “our standing in the international community.” But Trump’s position remains clear: if foreign governments can’t or won’t help us keep our people safe, they don’t get to send travelers here.

Of course, a legal challenge is inevitable. Lower court judges in liberal districts will likely try to block the ban, echoing the chaos of Trump’s first term. But this administration has learned from the past and is fully prepared for a courtroom fight.

The bigger question is whether Democrats will ever acknowledge the real problem. Soliman’s attack wasn’t an isolated incident—it was a symptom of a system that prioritizes political correctness over national security. Trump’s new ban may be bold, but it’s also necessary—and long overdue.

As the debate rages, one truth remains: the federal government’s first job is to protect its own people. On that front, Trump just made a strong move. And if the left wants to defend the right of unvetted travelers from terror-prone nations to enter the U.S., they can try doing it with a straight face in 2026.