Written by Hamid Ghandehari, Professor, University of Utah

On December 18, 2015, the United States Congress passed the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act, known as H.R. 158. When this bill goes into effect, citizens of member countries of the Visa Waiver Program who are dual nationals of Iran, Iraq, Sudan or Syria, or those citizens who have traveled to any of these four countries in the past five years, will need to obtain a Visa to enter the United States. These citizens will not be eligible for the visa waiver program. In many cases, dual nationality is not a choice for these individuals since their “old country” does not recognize their new citizenship. For example, a naturalized U.S. citizen who was born in Iran forty years ago would be considered a dual national even if he/she has not set foot in Iran since immigrating to the U.S. at age 5.

It is likely that this law will be reciprocated by all or some of the “visa waiver” member countries. If so, U.S. citizens who are dual nationals of the designated four countries, or those U.S. citizens who have traveled to any of these four countries in the past five years, will need to get a visa to travel to any of the visa waiver member countries that reciprocate. Other U.S. citizens will not have to do so. For instance, this act would require a German citizen of Syrian descent to obtain a visa in order to participate in a professional conference in Los Angeles, whereas his classmate who is not a dual national of any of the designated four countries would not. If and when France reciprocates, this act will lead to situations whereby Iranian-American business professionals would need to attain visas in order to participate in business meetings in Paris, whereas their European descendent co-workers would not. Under this act, a Sudanese mother – a naturalized citizen of the U.S. – who wants to visit her relatives in Italy (if and when Italy reciprocates) would need to get a visa to go to Italy, while her neighbor, an Italian American who would like to visit her ancestral homeland in Italy, would not.

This act is discriminatory and represents an unacceptable breach of civil rights. It discriminates based on national origin and curtails the civil liberties of peaceful citizens of the 38 member countries affected by it. Many organizations, professionals, and some lawmakers, as well as many independent citizens, have voiced concern over this act. This act can have ramifications for children of the affected citizens, as well as gender-specific consequences.

For example, according to the American Civil Liberties Union, “With respect to descent, Syrian citizenship [as an example country] is conferred to children born of a Syrian father, regardless of the child’s country of birth or children born of a Syrian mother and an unknown or stateless father. The proposal [now endorsed by the US Congress] would yield the untenable result of folding such gender-based distinctions into U.S. law.” Another example is that many U.S. citizens of Iranian descent who were born in the U.S. travel to Iran to visit their extended family (e.g., grandparents). To do so they have to obtain Iranian passport and this effectively places them in the “dual national” category.

Citizens of Iranian, Iraqi, Sudanese, or Syrian descent, similar to many other global citizens, contribute immensely to the economy and social fabric of their adopted societies. They build infrastructure, teach at schools and universities, serve in healthcare and other service sectors, lead successful businesses and the like. HR158 discriminates against these citizens and treats them as potential threats. Their families will not be able to enjoy the same freedom to travel as their neighbors, coworkers, and friends.

This act will not be effective in preventing terrorism and violent behavior. In fact, it is likely that it will alienate communities who can participate in prevention of violent behavior. One of the victims, as well as one of the first responders of the infamous San Bernardino attack, were both Iranian-Americans.

Many terrorists are not from the four designated countries. Blanket discrimination based on national origin (or any other category for that matter, such as religion) is wrong and against democratic values. Unfortunately, there are precedents for such discriminatory actions during times of war and crises. The internment of Japanese-Americans in the U.S. during World War II with inhumane consequences is only one such example. It is incumbent on peaceful citizens of the United States, and all the 38 visa waiver countries, who seek justice and are against irrational, fear-induced discrimination, to oppose such prejudicial treatment of people based on their national origin.

As a community of peaceful citizens we need to stand in solidarity with citizens of the 38 waiver countries who are dual nationals of Iranian, Iraqi, Sudanese, and Syrian descent, and other citizens who will be adversely affected by this act. This new legislation is a breach of the civil liberties of these citizens and needs to be repealed through community and nationwide action. We need to bring awareness to our communities with the ultimate goal of repealing this law. The ramifications of such discriminatory actions need to be taught in educational institutions, community settings and through mass media. Progressive lawyers need to assist the affected communities to oppose and repeal this law. Citizens of the member visa waiver countries need to organize grassroots activities and prevent the reciprocation of this law in their home countries. At times of crises, such as what we are facing in the world today, it is particularly important to guard and protect our civil liberties when they are under attack. Discriminatory actions such as this can take us down a slippery slope of intolerance and set the stage for other types of discriminations with potential grave consequences.