Essay On Minorities In America

Trump Administration and Minorities in America
In recent years our country has become more aware of social issues impacting millions of people in this country. Minorities currently account for 22.3 percent of the population and are expected to rise in the years to come. By 2060 minorities are predicted to make up 56 percent of the population and in 2020 half of all children will be mixed race (news). However, there are also other minorities besides those of ethnicity. The LGBTQ community is one of those making up estimated 3.5 percent about nine million people. While the United States is a country based on freedom and equal rights, stating liberty and justice for all, some argue that minorities in our country still have yet to achieve these
same rights. With the current political shift in our nation, some have said that there has been a growing divide. The biggest example was the during the election, where the opposing candidates began to represent opposite philosophical viewpoints concerning the changing culture of our country. Terms such as political correctness became mainstream and bringing wider public opinion on the subject. The Trump campaign led the opposition to Political Correctness and (took in) a wide variety of people. Some of them wanting to weaken the progress made by particular groups of individuals. The Trump Administration's policies and legislation will have an adverse impact on minorities in the United States because of current and prior actions with regarding minorities in our country.

In the past month, President Trump has tried to implement his policies on immigration impacting thousands of Muslims in the United States.
His first executive order on the issue called for the immediate ban of all refugees entering the States from the countries of Libya, Sudan, Somalia, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, and Iran for 120 days. It also banned refugees from Syria “Indefinitely” and suspended visas from the seven countries for 90 days (Levenson). Critics of the Ban feared that it was unlawful and discriminated against Muslims. The order would just fuel what people may say is fear or misunderstanding of Muslims in America. On the March 6th, the president signed a new immigration ban now exempting people from Iraq and lawful residents of the U.S holding green cards or visas. It also no longer indefinitely bans refugees from Syria (Vitali). The administration also made it clear that the order is not a ban on Muslims but a ban on people from countries where screening for terrorism is “inadequate” (Vitali). The old order was said to be rushed and not made clear enough resulting in the problems and controversy that ensued in its creation. The new order is more clear and concise in its inception (Vitali). These new revisions seem to show order is for protecting the country from terrorism, while protecting the rights of lawful residents to travel freely. While some may say the new order no longer infringes on the rights of Muslims living in America for these reasons and protects
them, the fact of the matter is the Travel Ban is discriminatory in nature and has no firm foundation. The countries in the travel ban are all majority Muslim. Clearly, aimed at Islamic terrorists who are associated with most recent terror attacks since 9/11. Interestingly enough all 19 terrorists from 9/11 were from none of the countries included in the ban, the majority, 15 of them, hailing from Saudi Arabia. Even with this information 9/11 was sighted as a reason for the ban (BBC). More details show that no fatal attacks have been carried out by refugees. Plus the majority of recent terror attacks have all been executed by us citizens with the most by born citizens. (BBC; Vitali; Mueller). The ban is more detrimental to the U.S than it is helping it. The ban can easily be used by terrorist organizations to provide evidence of us anti-Muslim sentiments thereby increasing support for their cause, which enhances the potential for more attacks. In the short term Muslims in America will face more discriminatory measures when traveling to and from the states, but in the long run, could encounter growing anti-Muslim sentiment in the country along with more violations of their rights based on nationality.

The Trump administration decided to repeal the Transgender Bathroom guidelines in public schools implemented by the Obama Administration. This decision would give power back to states to decide appropriate action on the issue. Allowing for local government to discuss and find solutions to the issue with their communities. The main goal to provide protection and safety to all students attending public school (Associated Press). This decision is meant to allow local communities to find their solutions based on their individual situations and not grouped into the broad guidelines of schools across the country big and small. However, this thinking does not take into account the primary purpose of the guidelines, to protect transgender students, a minority, who have not been and will no longer receive the protection and rights they deserve in public. As a minority, transgender students are less likely to receive proper representation when states and local governments create their policies. Already the decision shows how different states and areas vary from each other
“In 14 states and the District of Columbia, there are explicit protections for transgender students on the books. In North Carolina, transgender people are barred from using bathrooms that align with their gender identity. Several other states have floated similar legislation, some with financial penalties for schools that allow transgender students to use bathrooms of their choice” (Brown; Balingit)
The decision for many, definitely shows the President will not be true to his word to protect and take into account the LGBTQ community. Even with statements by him and the white house, “The President is proud to have been the first ever GOP (Republican) nominee to mention the LGBTQ community in his nomination acceptance speech, pledging then to protect the community from violence and oppression," (Kearney, Trotta). Many civil rights activists and groups believe this to show that the Trump Administration will negatively impact the rights of people who are LGBTQ and is undoing the progress the country has made. Such as Nancy Pelosi the House Minority Leader “This move shows that President Trump cannot be trusted to defend the rights of LGBT Americans” James Esseks of the ACLU "Revoking the guidance indicates that the president's promise to protect LGBT rights was just empty rhetoric” (Associated Press). Many looked to the Gavin Grimm supreme court case, which involves a transgender student from Virginia fighting to use the boys’ restroom at school. The supreme court remanded the case to the court of appeals earlier this March. The effect of these events is a clear sign the Administration will not live up to its promises of protecting the LGBTQ, leaving many uncertain of the future under Trump.