Mariana Padrón* is a Venezuelan journalist living in New York on a talent visa. She's still awaiting approval for her permanent residency and green card, so the travel ban announced earlier this month by President Donald Trump—which prohibits entry to citizens of 12 countries and limits visas for seven others—came as a surprise and a source of concern.
“I've decided to take extreme precautions. That is, not to travel, not to expose myself, not to use it, because I'm still Venezuelan,” Padrón told LatAm Journalism Review (LJR). “My worst fear is leaving and not being able to come back. My things are here. I have a rented apartment, I have my friends, my community…”
This provision has limited Padrón not only personally but also professionally. Her work as a journalist involves traveling outside the United States to cover or attend events. “My case isn't one of the toughest, but it shows how no matter how well you're doing things [legally], we're all being affected,” she said.
Padrón's situation reflects how the Trump administration's recent immigration policies are affecting foreign journalists traveling to or from the United States. Although she is not directly banned, her fear of leaving the country and not being able to return demonstrates how the new restrictions—justified on grounds of national security—are limiting the work and mobility of the international press in a climate marked by uncertainty and discretion exercised by immigration officers.
Trump’s recent proclamation, which prohibits or restricts entry into the United States by citizens of 19 countries—including Cuba, Haiti, and Venezuela—is justified by the U.S. president as a security measure in response to the "very high risk" posed by foreigners entering the country with "inadequate vetting."
It is also justified on the grounds that nationals of some countries may pose significant risks of overstaying their visas, increasing the burden on immigration and enforcement in the United States.
“Venezuela lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures,” the proclamation says. “Venezuela has historically refused to accept back its removable nationals. According to the Overstay Report, Venezuela had a B‑1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 9.83 percent.”
Cuba, like Venezuela, is subject to partial restrictions. Among the reasons given by the U.S. are its status as a state sponsor of terrorism, its lack of cooperation with U.S. authorities, and its refusal to allow the repatriation of its citizens.
In the case of Haiti, entry of its nationals is completely suspended for both immigrants and nonimmigrants. According to the proclamation, hundreds of thousands of Haitians entered the United States illegally during the administration of former President Joe Biden, and the visa overstay rates were between 25 and 31%.
The measure, effective June 9, provides exceptions for lawful permanent residents, individuals with current visas, certain specific visa categories, and those whose entry is deemed beneficial to the interests of the United States.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that "a visa is a privilege, not a right" and they are reserved only for those who make the United States better. (Photo: Gage Skidmore/Flickr).
However, immigration lawyer Roberto Sarmiento told LJR that entry into the United States will be at the discretion of the immigration officer on duty.
“The officer's discretion plays a very important role, and that's where this measure hurts us,” Sarmiento said. “We have to be at the mercy of someone who may be racist, someone who may not know the law, or someone who may not even know what type of visa they're looking at.”
In March, more than 300 student visas were revoked without clear justification as part of a mass deportation campaign. Regarding this, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that "a visa is a privilege, not a right" and they are reserved only for those who make the United States better, not those who seek to destroy it from within.
Sarmiento said those holding the I visa —which allows foreign journalists to enter the country to cover news events or report for foreign audiences—could also be at risk of being stopped from entering the U.S. Permanent residency is the only safe option currently, he said.
"There's no problem as long as they complete the residency process, and obviously have gone through the entire certification and sponsorship process through their profession or the news organization where they work," Sarmiento said.
Journalists from other countries not covered by the ban are also subject to the discretion of U.S. officials when entering the United States.
In May, Chilean journalist Nicolás Sepúlveda was scheduled to visit the United States to attend a ceremony where he would receive the LASA Media Award, presented by the Latin American Studies Association. However, days before his departure, his Visa Waiver status was changed to "unauthorized" without justification.
Media outlets that reported on the incident speculated that a social media post by the Chilean journalist about the situation in Gaza could have something to do with it. However, Sepúlveda claimed to have only shared journalistic content from news agencies.
“I know they make a big deal out of being a democracy that operates under the parameters of a liberal democracy, but if they are restricting entry into their country because of what people write on social media or other platforms, that is typical of authoritarian, non-democratic governments,” Sepúlveda told LJR.
Many journalists have also been affected by other travel and immigration policies enacted by Trump: programs such as Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for nationals of countries like Venezuela have been eliminated; humanitarian parole programs for citizens of Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela have been halted; and asylum applications at the U.S.-Mexico border have been closed.
In April, the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) published a guide for journalists planning to travel to the United States.
According to the document, journalists should anticipate potential restrictions, confiscation and search of devices, or questioning when traveling to or from the United States.
“If there is a chance that you are affected by increased scrutiny at the U.S. border, consider whether travel is essential or if reporting can be conducted remotely,” CPJ said.
Sarmiento said that in recent years, he has seen an increase in clients among Latin American journalists who saw the United States as an option to escape the violence and authoritarian regimes in the region and, at the same time, to be able to continue practicing their profession. He said this is a worrying issue, considering that freedom of expression is a human right.
“I'm worried. Journalists don't know whether to use a semicolon or a full stop when reporting because they don't know who they're going to offend,” Sarmiento said. “Before, the media were the good ones, the objective ones, the responsible ones. Now it seems like everyone is offended.”
(*)The journalist asked not to use her real name for fear that it might affect her residency application process.
