Faced with protests, some in GOP suggest order was too hasty, suggest a rethink

Paul Singer | USA TODAY

Show Caption Hide Caption Raw: Protests Continue After Immigration Ban Protests have erupted for the second day after US President Donald Trump issued an executive order to temporarily bar refugees and citizens of seven predominantly Muslim countries from entering the U.S. (Jan 29)

Faced with a cascade of protests across the country against President Trump’s temporary ban on refugees from predominantly Muslim countries, some Republicans suggested the order may have been too broad and hastily written.

But the top Senate Republican, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, avoided directly criticizing Trump and said the courts would have to decide the legality of the president’s actions.

McConnell said Sunday he supports enhanced vetting of refugees, but said the courts would have to look at the order to see if it is too broad.

"We need to bear in mind that we don’t have religious tests in this country and we also need to remember that some of our best allies in the war against Islamic terrorism are Muslims,"McConnell said on ABC's This Week. "It's hopefully going to be decided in the courts as to whether or not this has gone too far. I don't what to criticize them for improving vetting. I think we need to be careful. We don't have religious tests in this country."

Also critical was Sen, Bob Corker, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

"We all share a desire to protect the American people, but this executive order has been poorly implemented, especially with respect to green card holders," Corker said. "The administration should immediately make appropriate revisions, and it is my hope that following a thorough review and implementation of security enhancements that many of these programs will be improved and reinstated."

Rep. Mike McCaul, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, said Sunday "In light of the confusion and uncertainty created in the wake of the President’s Executive Order, it is clear adjustments are needed." McCaul said it is important to have tougher screening measures to prevent terrorists from sneaking in as refugees, but he added, "In the future, such policy changes should be better coordinated with the agencies implementing them and with Congress to ensure we get it right—and don’t undermine our nation’s credibility while trying to restore it.”

At a Saturday town hall meeting with constituents, Jim Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee's subcommittee on immigration and border security, said that people with green cards who are from countries affected by the president's order should not be allowed into the United States.

But he later said he had misspoken.

"After a town hall meeting, I was pressed to answer questions about whether the President's immigration pause should apply to green card holders. I do not believe it is right to ban green card holders from entering the United States absent evidence of a threat, regardless of where they are from. I misspoke and I apologize for the confusion."

Other Republicans said Trump's order went too far.

Sen. John McCain, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, criticized the execution or the order and said it would probably provide a propaganda advantage to ISIS, the terrorist network.

Read more:

Rep. Barbara Comstock, a Republican from the Virginia suburbs of Washington, D.C., said that while she supports increased vetting for national security concerns, Trump's order “went beyond the increased vetting actions that Congress has supported on a bipartisan basis and inexplicably applied to green card holders, people who are legally within our country who have followed the rules . . . this should be addressed and corrected expeditiously."

Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, said on CNN Sunday that the order was “not properly vetted” and should be stayed until Congress can get involved.

“You have an extreme vetting proposal that didn’t get the vetting it should have had, and as a result, in the implementation we’ve seen some problems,” he said. “I think we should slow down.”

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said “I strongly urge the new administration to move quickly to tailor its policy on visa issuance as narrowly as possible, delivering on our security needs while reducing unnecessary burdens on the vast majority of visa-seekers that present a promise — not a threat — to our nation.” Hatch noted that Mormons were also once a persecuted religious minority, and his ancestors were "refugees" who were "driven from their homes."

Hatch is the most senior Republican in the U.S. Senate and is considering running for an eighth term in 2018. Trump carried Utah with just under 46% of the vote, as 20% voted for GOP candidate Evan McMullin, a Mormon who ran as an alternative to Trump.

Read more:

Rep. Charlie Dent, a moderate Republican from central Pennsylvania, was more blunt. "This is ridiculous," he told The Washington Post. "I guess I understand what his intention is, but unfortunately the order appears to have been rushed through without full consideration."

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said “the worldwide refugee ban set forth in the executive order is overly broad and implementing it will be immediately problematic."

Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., indicated on Twitter that Trump's order should be reconsidered.

We should value freedom & not surrender security. We can protect the homeland while upholding #religiousfreedom & refuge for the persecuted. — Sen. James Lankford (@SenatorLankford) January 29, 2017

In a later statement, Lankford said the order "is not a ban on Muslims or a permanent change in immigration policy." But he added, "This executive action has some unintended consequences that were not well thought out. I encourage the president's staff to evaluate American policy with an eye on both security and compassion for the refugees fleeing the terrors of war and persecution."

Rep. Raúl Labrador, R-Idaho, a leader of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, strongly supported the intent of Trump's order, saying "President Trump has finally taken necessary national security and public safety measures regarding refugees and non-immigrants seeking entry. The media’s mischaracterization of the order as a ‘ban on Muslims’ is not only false, it is intentionally designed to mislead the public and to undermine the President's agenda."

But he added, “The Administration, however, could have done a better job of implementing this executive order. They failed to provide clear guidance on the policy which caused substantial confusion at the ports of entry. I urge the Administration to revisit the order's applicability to legal permanent residents of the United States, and exercise great care before taking future action."

USA TODAY reporter Michael Collins and the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel contributed to this story.