In an increasingly tough line on immigration and security threats, US President Donald Trump has signed Executive Order 14161, which now threatens to significantly change the entry rules for millions of tourists and business travellers.
The order, signed on 20 January 2025, will require entrants from visa-free countries, including most EU countries - to account for up to five years of social media activity, phone numbers called, email addresses and biometric data such as fingerprints and iris scans. It is an escalation of Trump's ”America First”-agenda, but also a move that critics warn could lead to a global chain reaction of opinion control at borders.
Tighter controls: from ESTA to full screening
For travellers from 42 visa-free countries, such as Sweden, the UK and Germany, the Electronic System for Travel Authorisation (ESTA) process has so far been a simple formality - an online application for a $40 fee for up to 90 days of stay, but under a proposal from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), published in Federal Register On 10 December, the disclosure of detailed personal information will soon become mandatory. Among others:
- Social media: Full history from platforms such as Facebook, Twitter (X), Instagram and TikTok over the last five years.
- Contact details: Telephone numbers and e-mail addresses used during the same period.
- Biometrics: Self-portrait (selfies) for facial recognition, plus fingerprint and eye scanning on entry.
- Family ties: Names and dates of birth of close relatives.
CBP justifies the changes with reference to Executive Order 14161, which aims to ”protect the United States against foreign terrorists and other threats to national security and public safety”. The process is expected to take significantly longer - from days to weeks - and will affect not only new travellers but also those already in the US on visas, who will now be screened retroactively.
Tourism has already been hit hard. According to U.S. Travel Association International visitor numbers are expected to fall by 6.3% in 2025, with a loss of revenue of $12.5 billion - partly due to Trump's restrictive policies. Experts warn that the new rules could scare away even more people, especially ahead of events such as the 2026 World Cup.
”Wrong” opinions as security threats: from students to tourists
The most controversial issue is how to use this data. It is still unclear exactly what views can lead to rejection, but the pattern is clear from existing cases. Already today, student visas are being cancelled for foreign students who have criticised Israel or engaged in pro-Palestinian activities. One example is the Turkish PhD student Rümeysa Öztürk at Tufts University, whose visa was revoked in March 2025 following an opinion piece criticising the university's handling of the Gaza conflict. She was arrested and detained for six weeks before a federal court temporarily restored her status, citing violations of free speech.
Similar cases include Mahmoud Khalil and Mohsen Mahdawi at Columbia University, whose visa was cancelled for ”anti-Semitic protests” and ”support for terrorism” - terms that critics say are widely used to silence dissent. A senior official at the State Department recently testified in court that criticism of Israeli policies, such as calls for reduced military aid or ”abolition of Zionism”, can weigh in on visa decisions.
This ties in with a leaked DOJ memo from Attorney General Pam Bondi, dated 4 December 2025, which expands the definition of ”domestic terrorism”. The memo lists views such as ”anti-American”, ”anti-Christian” and ”anti-capitalist” as potential indicators of terrorist threats, along with support for ”mass immigration”, ”radical gender ideology” and opposition to immigration laws. The FBI is encouraged to draw up lists of suspicious groups and offer rewards for tips - a policy critics call ”a thought police law” and a threat to the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
These criteria are expected to be applied to travellers, meaning that a tweet on climate justice or criticism of US foreign policy could potentially block your trip.
Global ripple effect: EU and UK respond with their own measures?
The US policy risks triggering a domino effect. The European Commission has not yet officially responded to the proposal, but concerns are growing in Brussels and member states. According to Euronews and the BBC, the new rules could lead to reciprocal demands: EU citizens forced to open their profiles publicly to US authorities could face similar screening when entering Europe. Germany's foreign ministry has already warned that ”reciprocity” may be necessary, while the French government is discussing biometric checks for US travellers.
The UK, which is not an EU member but part of the visa waiver programme, has gone further. The country has recently arrested journalist Richard Medhurst under Terrorism Act 2000, suspected of ”expressing support for a prohibited organisation” through his reporting on Gaza and Lebanon. Medhurst, a Syrian-British journalist with over a million followers, was held for 24 hours without clear explanation - a case the NUJ and IFJ call a ”chilling threat to press freedom”.
Also former MP George Galloway, leader of the Workers Party of Britain, was arrested in September 2025 at Gatwick Airport during counter-terrorism-legislation. He and his wife were questioned for hours about their views on the Gaza conflict, without being formally arrested, but with orders not to leave. Galloway described it as ”political persecution” and part of a broader campaign against left-wing opposition.
These incidents illustrate a trend: countries like the UK and potentially EU countries are now introducing their own registers of ”wrong” views and contacts, requiring ”clean” profiles for entry. This is creating a world where travelling requires not just a passport, but political loyalty.
Implications for travellers and democracy
For the average Swedish tourist, this means significantly longer waiting times, greater uncertainty and a sense of surveillance. Even business travellers risk being stopped if an old tweet flagged as ”anti-American”, and for activists? It is a direct attack on free speech, which the ACLU and FIRE call ”ideologically driven counter-terrorism”.
The Trump administration defends itself with national security, but critics point to the lack of clear guidelines - what exactly is ”hateful ideology”? As Loyola Law Schools Professor Marissa Montes notes: ”It is broad and discretionary, giving officials the power to interpret at will.”
While the proposal is out for consultation, it is likely to come into force soon. Travellers are urged to clear profiles and be careful, but in a democracy thoughts should be free, not border guarded. The question is: will the world accept a future where passports require political purity?
Göran Reuterdahl, former Vice President of companies such as Ericsson and Microsoft and CEO of smaller listed companies, spokesperson for Swedish Sovereignty in Ambition Sverige | Photo: Ulf Gabrielsson, retouch Andreas Jansson