This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2017, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

After federal courts skewered his first attempt, President Donald Trump has ventured a second executive order to temporarily ban travel from several Muslim-majority countries, this time leaving Iraq off the list and applying the restrictions to only new visas.

Signed Monday, the revised order looks to avoid the legal pitfalls that foiled the president's first version issued in January. Instead of exempting from the ban minority faiths, such as Christians living in the Middle East, the newly crafted language encompasses all religions.

And after criticism that the first order sought to fulfill Trump's campaign calls for a "Muslim ban," Monday's version notes that the previous draft was "not motivated by animus toward any religion." It does, though, follow a tumultuous week of leaks and Russian revelations swarming the White House, and some officials have suggested its release is an effort to draw attention away from that.

With provisions rolling out over the next two weeks and full implementation scheduled for March 16, the order seeks to block entry of nationals from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for 90 days. An additional refugee moratorium on all countries will extend for 120 days — lifting the previous indefinite ban set specifically for Syria.

Hatch on board • Sen. Orrin Hatch applauded the revisions Monday, saying "the current situation in the Middle East presents a number of tough choices for the new administration." The Republican senator supported the original order, too, though he encouraged Trump at the time to tailor the policy as "narrowly as possible."

"With today's updated order, the president has made significant progress toward that goal," Hatch said in a prepared statement. "I applaud him for his leadership and urge him to continue the difficult work of crafting policies that keep us safe while living up to our best values."

The new edict comes 38 days after Trump's first and somewhat harried executive order on Jan. 27 and 25 days after a federal appeals court refused to reinstate the ban on Feb. 9. A lower court had ruled that the order unconstitutionally barred entry into the country based on religion.

"As we've always maintained, the executive order was fully lawful in the first place," said White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer during an off-camera press gaggle Monday, "and we would've won the related legal cases on the merits. But rather than leave America's security in limbo while the litigation dragged on — some estimates having that go up to potentially a year — the president acted to protect the national security by issuing a new executive order that addresses the court's concerns, some of which merely involve clarifying the intent of the original executive order."

The edict has been billed as an anti-terrorism measure aimed at increasing screening and vetting for those coming into the country. That process can already take between 18 and 36 months, but would include more interviews, questioning and verification.

The order suggests that "some of those who have entered the United States" as immigrants have carried out attacks on American soil and 300 refugees across the nation are currently "the subjects of counterterrorism investigations" by the FBI. However, none of the deadly jihadist attacks in the United States since Sept. 11, 2001, were committed by anyone with connections to the six banned countries, according to the New America Foundation.

Iraq was taken off the list in the new version, Spicer said, because the country "took steps to increase their cooperation" with the United States. Even still, the country also had no ties to fatal terrorist activities in America.

Low-key release • During the first release, Trump ostentatiously rolled out the order and promised it would keep "radical Islamic terrorists" out of the country. "We don't want them here," he said at the time.

In unveiling the new order Monday, Trump was much quieter, posting on Facebook a photo of him signing the paper in the Oval Office. It's unclear why the president was more low-key in making the announcement the second time around.

Rep. Chris Stewart, R-Utah, says it should be a "top priority" of the federal government to safeguard its citizens from foreign threats. His stance, Stewart notes, is informed by his travel to war-torn countries as part of the House Intelligence Committee.

"It became clear to me 18 months ago that terrorist organizations may try to use the refugee program to infiltrate the United States," he said in a prepared statement. "Until we can improve the vetting process, this narrow, temporary pause is needed to protect our national security."

After a rocky and rushed attempt with the first order, Rep. Jason Chaffetz is also on board with the version issued Monday. Though there was initial confusion over whether Trump's last draft applied to green card holders and other legal residents — what became the central argument in overturning the order in court — the newest edict applies only to new visa issuance, he said, "which is a good move."

"It needed to be tighter top to bottom and it looks like they've done that with this one," said Chaffetz, chairman of the House Oversight Committee.

Local immigrant groups and Democrats, though, say the new travel ban is just a dressed-up version of the last one.

"Donald Trump's administration has put a new shiny suit on the same old executive order and is trying to sell it as something other than a Muslim ban, which I believe it still is," said Peter Corroon, chairman of the Utah Democratic Party.

He suggests that it is "pretty horrific" to stop refugees from coming into the country, even temporarily, because many are attempting to escape poor living conditions, civil wars and dictatorships.

Refugees • The new order caps the number of refugees to be allowed into the United States at 50,000 per year. The Obama administration had previously cleared up to 110,000.

About 300 people were slated to come to Utah between March 16 — the order's effective date — and October, said Danielle Stamos, spokeswoman for Catholic Community Services, which is one of two refugee resettlement programs in the state. Now there's a "ripple effect" of uncertainty, she said.

"We don't know what will happen to them," Stamos added, "if they'll have to start their background checks and resettlement process over again or if they'll resume where they were."

Though there is "some language that is an improvement" from the first executive order, Stamos hesitates to say that the newest draft will be better for immigrants. She fears arrests and protests will break out at airports across the country as they did before.

"The bulk of this executive order is really the same," she said.

There are some notable exemptions and potential case-by-case waivers outlined in the new order that were not included in the previous version. These include provisions for foreign nationals seeking asylum, engaging in long-term work or study, fulfilling business obligations and receiving medical care.

Nevertheless, ACLU Legal Director David Cole calls the order a Muslim ban "2.0" and threatens a lawsuit over religious discrimination.

"President Trump, we'll see you in court," Cole wrote in an online post.

Republican Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, who was initially skeptical and had "technical questions" about the first order, said Monday this type of overhaul and reform to the nation's immigration policy was "long overdue."

"That said, Utah has a long and proud tradition of serving those in need, particularly refugees," he said in a prepared statement. "I hope that the Trump administration is able to establish a safe and efficient vetting system by the time this temporary ban is over so that we can continue to open our hearts and serve those in need."

Utah's history is one of refugees. The Mormon pioneers, facing persecution, were driven from state to state until settling in the Salt Lake Valley. That background underlines efforts to accept refugees in the state, where more than 60,000 have been settled since 1970. About 1,200 have arrived annually in recent years — most from Somalia and Iraq — and about 60 percent are Muslim.

Twitter: @CourtneyLTanner