Transcript of the above video: 

As the title of this video suggests, we are discussing Trump's recent "Travel Ban" which in reality is basically a travel pause, as we're watching the Immigration Apparatus in the United States, through the Department of State, the Embassies and Consulates abroad, that pertain to the 75 countries that were listed in Mr. Trump's Memorandum, basically we are seeing them implementing this policy. Now as many have pointed out, it does not pertain to Non-immigrant Visas. That said, it doesn't per se pertain to Non-Immigrant Visas, but guess what? Section 214(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act effectively does. 

I thought of making this video after reading a recent comment on our channel. Quoting directly: "The US Embassy is not honest." Well I don't necessarily agree with that at all. That said, quoting further: "Wants proof of strong ties but does not want to see the proof. Just take your money and reject; no appeal, no refund." Okay. What this person is talking about is what is called section 214(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act which stipulates that a Consular Officer interviewing someone for a Non-Immigrant Visa like a US Tourist Visa, must be substantially satisfied that the applicant demonstrates requisite strong ties to their home country and weak ties to the United States. First off, as this commenter pointed out or as can be gleaned from this comment, most folks concentrate on the “strong ties” part of that analysis. That is really not the hard part. Any Thai national in Thailand to my mind demonstrates strong ties. They are in their home whole country, presumptively they're going to return. The issue is weak ties. So oftentimes if you have a relationship with an American, basically that can mitigate against the weak ties side of the analysis. Now couple that with what is called the Doctrine of Consular Absolutism or the Doctrine of Consular Non-reviewability which that stipulates that Consular Officers’ fact-finding decisions regarding Visa applications and the adjudication thereof are not subject to any sort of appeal or judicial review. There is actually a case, I think it's from like 1804, that goes into this where basically, it wasn't even the Supreme Court it was like an Appellate Court, and the Supremes just affirmed it - basically said look we are not going to look over the shoulder of Consular Officers abroad when they are making decisions regarding Visa outcomes. We are just not going to do that, that's not our place and it wouldn't be very efficient, even if they did. 

The point I am trying to make with this video is while the Trump Travel “Ban” does not necessarily preclude someone from getting into the United States on a Tourist Visa - it is still possible to interview and be processed for a Tourist Visa - 214(b) leads to a number of denials. I mean it's in the upper 90 percentile here in Thailand, it just does. It's just the nature of it; 214b leads to a lot of denials. So while Trump's Travel Ban does not per se target Non-Immigrant Visas, I don't see where we are going to see some huge spike in Tourist Visas coming from the US Embassy here in the Kingdom of Thailand.