Proponents argue that this strategy would bolster national security by minimizing the risk of potential terrorists entering the country. Enhanced screening processes, once implemented, would provide a more thorough assessment of applicants, reducing the likelihood of malicious actors gaining entry. Critics argue that such a policy might inadvertently promote discrimination by broadly categorizing individuals based on their nation of origin rather than specific, credible threat intelligence. It may strain diplomatic relations with the affected countries and potentially harm the perception of the nation enacting the ban, being seen as hostile or prejudiced towards certain international communities. Additionally, genuine refugees fleeing terrorism or persecution in their home countries might be unjustly denied safe haven.
Response rates from 289 European Union voters.
Trend of support over time for each answer from 289 European Union voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Trend of how important this issue is for 289 European Union voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Unique answers from European Union voters whose views went beyond the provided options.
Based on 289 responses to this question.
These results come from VOTA's ongoing political issues survey. We collect over a million responses per day, filter out duplicate and multiple submissions, and break the results down by political party, ideology, age, state, and census demographics (income, race, education, household).
VOTA is non-partisan — we don't advocate for any party, candidate, or position. We report what the public tells us.
Writing about this issue? Use the live data and link back to the full results.