'' The New York Times '' reported that " for an action aimed at terrorism , the order appeared to garner little or no support among experts and former officials of every political stripe with experience in the field . " Experts on terrorism , such as Charles Kurzman of the University of North Carolina , Brian Michael Jenkins of the RAND Corporation , and Daniel Benjamin of Dartmouth College , formerly the State Department 's top counterterrorism official . Benjamin said that the order was unlikely to reduce the terrorist threat , and " many experts believe the order 's unintended consequences will make the threat worse . " Kurzman noted that since the September 11 attacks in 2001 , no one has been killed in the U.S. in a terrorist attack by anyone who emigrated from or whose parents emigrated from the seven affected countries . Jenkins explained that of the 147 Jihadist plots and attacks since 9/11 , 105 were perpetrated by U.S. citizens and 20 involved legal permanent residents . " In other words , 85 percent of the terrorists lived in the U.S. a long time before carrying out an attack — they were radicalized within the nation 's borders . " Jenkins went on to say : " Had this temporary prohibition been in effect since 9/11 , how many lives would have been saved Not one . " While Jenkins conceded that there were two individuals whose entry would have been prevented had the ban been in place since 9/11 , both were in the country for years prior to engaging in terrorist related activities . According to Jenkins , the " ... failure to identify these individuals before they entered the United States is not a flaw in the vetting process ; it is our inability to predict human behavior years into the future . " According to '' The New York Times '' reporter Scott Shane , the seven countries in the executive order had a " random quality " ; the list excluded Saudi Arabia and Egypt ( where many jihadist groups were founded ) and Pakistan and Afghanistan ( where extremism has a long history , and which have " produced militants who have occasionally reached the United States " ) . Benjamin stated that the order might be counterproductive in terms of counterterrorism cooperation and feeding into " the jihadist narrative " of a West at war with Islam . Jonathan Schanzer of the conservative Foundation for the Defense of Democracies said that " The order appears to be based mainly on a campaign promise , " and did not appear to be tied to any effort to improve vetting or other procedures
September 11 attacks
September 11 attacks
Executive Order 13769