“If only he was interested in all violence against women in US, not just acts by foreigners,” Barr tweeted. “But that would require reporting himself.”

Those hoping to spread fears about Muslims are happy to go beyond gender violence claims. The far-right has similarly tried to tie bias against LGBTQ people specifically to Islam.

By mixing true statements about the problems that women, LGBTQ individuals and others face in the Muslim-majority world with lies about Islamic teachings and practice, Trump and his nationalist counterparts abroad posture as defenders of Western equality. (They neatly forget to mention their own parties’ records on gender and LGBTQ equality.)

Commentators have challenged this anti-Muslim narrative too. Trump’s argument is “a cynical exploitation of the vulnerability of one group in order to marginalize another vulnerable group,” New York University professor Regina Rini wrote in the Los Angeles Times last summer.

The viewpoint reflected in Trump’s new executive order is the same one that has inspired legislation targeting the nonexistent rise of Sharia, or Islamic law, in the U.S. It’s the perspective of people close to the president who believe any Muslim presence in America is somehow suspect. Former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn called Islam “a malignant cancer.” White House chief strategist Stephen Bannon has spoken of the global refugee crisis as “this Muslim invasion.”

Trump’s revised ban will face the scrutiny of courts that will ask whether it’s driven by anti-Muslim animus. (Or whether it fulfills a national security imperative, an argument that looks weaker by the day.)