Palestinian Photographer Misses World Press Photo Event Thanks to Trump Ban

A renowned photojournalist has spoken out after she was forced to cancel her planned attendance at the World Press Photo event in Amsterdam due to complications from Trump’s travel ban.

Eman Mohammed, a Palestinian photojournalist and TED Talk speaker, had been booked to jury the World Press Photo photojournalism event in Amsterdam, but had to pull out last minute after President Donald Trump issued the controversial executive order that places restrictions on travel for citizens of seven Middle Eastern countries. Mohammed is both a legal and permanent resident of the US and does not come from any of the seven countries listed in Trump’s order. However, according to the statement issued by World Press Photo, her lawyers have advised her that as a Palestinian, she should not travel for risk of being denied a return trip home.

The statement outlines that “[the issue of] the U.S. government’s executive order means she risks being unable to return to her family if she comes to Amsterdam." The decision follows much confusion over a grey area in regards to whether further countries with a large Muslim population are at risk from future bans.

Mohammed also spoke in depth about the situation with TIME LightBox, which you can read here.

[via TIME]

Log in or register to post comments
Deleted Account's picture

Stop it already. Nothing happened. She changed her plans... it doesn't mean that she would be denied return. There were many bans and restrictions during last 8 years and nobody was crying about it.

David Vaughn's picture

Which bans are you referring to?

Michael Kormos's picture

My 78-yr old grandma was detained at JFK on two separate occasions. This happened years ago. She is a permanent resident (US) but her travel pattern raised some suspicions apparently, and she was detained and questioned for hours by DHS. She was cool about it and cooperated. It's business as usual at any international port of entry.

I don't see the big deal about 11 people being detained, nor about some photographer having to change her plans.

We live in a world of headline opportunism, where anyone and everyone is seeking their moment in the spotlight by including themselves in a news story. People (and media) will distort, exaggerate, dramatize and intentionally misinterpret current events to help fuel their distaste for the current president.

I really hope Patrick and Lee exercise better oversight over the editorial content here. Left unchecked, it will devolve into another LiveLeak.

David Vaughn's picture

I'm sorry that happened to your grandma, but I'm not sure I understand the relevance to the current ban.

Sebastian Auer's picture

Hi Roman, ever were 'routinely' stopped and detained when entering a country? If not, I suggest you rather observe than judge. Unless you have been trough this type of routine (some are better than others) you have no experience to talk with. For some people it might be as bad as not returning home loosing a job, but having family to fall back on in a home country, for others its certain death - all depending where you come to a country from. Yes, she changed her plans - in order to not possibly be separated from her KIDS, who would be more traumatized by their than an adult!

Anonymous's picture

Well, by your logic, you can't comment on it either unless you've gone through a similar experience. Maybe your grandmother? Nope... doesn't count! ;-)

I think we're all a little too old to be so dramatic about, well...anything. :-)

Deleted Account's picture

First of all I didn't say a word about what I think about this policy. I suggest to read twice before you decide to reply.
Secondly, that women wasn't stopped and according to new policy she wouldn't be as she is not from banned country.
Thirdly, there was no outcry when innocent people were killed by american bombs, but when people from those countries are unable to enter the US there is suddenly big movement. It is just this fuucking hypocrisy that kills me.
Above that, the fact that she is a photographer doesn't make this story anyhow photography related...

Steve Urkel's picture

Remember all the other times that photographers and programmers and normal people weren't able to go back to America during the numerous immigration bans spanning the 15 years?

No? Well, thats probably because nobody reported it because it was accepted as normal behavior when an administration needs time to figure things out and imposes temporary bans.

This sucks for some people but this is far from being a unique situation.

Anonymous's picture

Without getting into the politics of it, I just want to point out, from the point of view of a non-American observer, that it is *abundantly* clear that this ban is different in structure, intent and scope compared to pretty much anything in the last three or four decades of US history. And not just who it covers and how long, but the way it has been rolled out, the decisionmaking process behind it, and the processes of implementation, exception and appeal.

Supporters of the ban need to decide to own what it actually is: unprecedented, different, and discriminatory in intent. Rather than run away from what it is when it is criticised.

Either it is a policy you support or it is not! Have an argument on the policy but be aware of the uniqueness of implementation. This ban is substantively different to the others as a matter of observable fact, and it is quite silly to suggest otherwise.

And beyond that, I hope you all find a way to move on. But in the meantime you're all going to have to accept the way human interest angles will bubble up on every blog everywhere; it's not just clicks, but also the real life impacts of the change.

Anonymous's picture

"Without getting into the politics of it"
"discriminatory in intent"

Come on, Morty! Make up your mind. ;-)

Anonymous's picture

It clearly _is_ discriminatory in intent, in that it discriminates based on country of origin (in some cases totally), on status, and where waivers are to be given, specifically gives priority to members of minority religions in a set of unambiguously majority-muslim states.

You can get that just by reading the executive order, which is surely representative of intent.

So this isn't politics, it's fact. Plain and simple.

Anonymous's picture

It DOES in fact discriminate by country but that's pretty much it. Everything else is incidental. The fact that these specific predominately Muslim countries, and not ALL predominately Muslim countries, are the source of a great deal of terrorism is what I like to call "a clue."
I think your perspective, while not necessarily extreme, is still political even if your intent wasn't.
That being said, I didn't find your comments to be especially objectionable but, rather, I try to bring a little comic relief to these kinds of debates. :-)

Peter Brody's picture

@Mike Houghton

Of course the ban discriminates. Look up the original meaning of that word. There is nothing inherently negative about it.

Priority should be given to "members of minority religions" (obviously Christians in this case) in that part of the world! Muslim countries don't take to kindly to those practicing another religion. Where have you been? Is the negative meaning of the word discrimination lost on you when it comes to the plight of Christians in the Middle East?? Certainly looks that way.

Anonymous's picture

" Is the negative meaning of the word discrimination lost on you when it comes to the plight of Christians in the Middle East?? Certainly looks that way."

And this certainly looks like an ad hominem attack. But I'll try not to read it as you calling me stupid, ignorant or callous.

But I will come down off the fence. So as to your other comment: as you say, I am a foreigner.

I am white and english. So at the moment I don't have to be too worried.

At the moment.

But I am also wise enough to understand this isn't about terrorism or illegal immigration. So I will accept it and move on.

Will you accept what comes next? Do you have any foreign colleagues? Because the process that is under way is going to visit them no matter what you might think. This isn't about terrorism or illegal immigration; those are baby steps. This is about economic nationalism.

That could affect me and my work, of course. But you know... there are probably nicer places to work, and there might even be nicer, kinder people to meet than Americans. I didn't think that possible until November last year.

Motti Bembaron's picture

Reality is, Christians and member of other non-Muslim religions, are seriously being discriminated in the same territories she is originated from.

Steve Urkel's picture

First off let me say I'm not a Trump supporter. The fact that I have to disclose that is part of the very reason this is an issue. The public is on edge and we are in the middle of a witch hunt on BOTH sides. And this idea that we have to pick one or the other is over-reactionary because choosing one side and fighting the other is not how you solve or discuss problems.

People who don't support the ban now (myself included) were just fine in ignoring the ban in the past. And thats because (up until recently) the American public understood that we don't have open borders and believed that coming into this amazing country was a privilege and not a right. But that understanding of facts has been lost for some reason.

This article is a solid example as to why our society (and the world watching it) is so split. These aren't news stories. They're one-sided editorials that exist primary to cause division. The same articles could have been written during past bans but they weren't because it really isn't as big a deal as its being played out to be. We've got problems here that are NOT only due to the current administration or even the last administration. We have old issues that need to be fixed and there is absolutely nothing wrong with putting on the brakes once in a while to do a walk around and see what is going on. But you can't do that when there's a crowd with pitchforks waiting for you to get out of your car.

Motti Bembaron's picture

Well said.

Peter Brody's picture

@Mike Houghton How is it fundamentally different? More importantly how is it wrong, since I suspect you believe it to be wrong? The fact is, this ban is an obviously common sense approach to the world we live in today. It is extremely long overdue. It needs to be expanded to other countries.

The primary duty of an American president is to defend America. As an American I find it highly offensive when foreigners try and tell us who we should be letting into our country. It's simply being anti-American.

All countries have the right to determine who it wishes to let in. That's fundamental to a country being a country. A country without control of its borders is no country. I suggest you "accept" that and "move on."

Dallas Dahms's picture

This kind of reporting is going to send me into a self-imposed media ban. #notevennews

Steve Urkel's picture

Whether you are right or left or middle, seeing blogs fall into this trap of agenda-driven articles is so sad. There literally is no escape from people trying to force their opinions on you.

I expected to remove the NYT and Washington Post from my news feed. But when you have to start unsubscribing from Tech sites like C-Net and The Verge, or photography sites like F-Stoppers then you know this media push is out of control with these one-sided articles.

Peter Brody's picture

Unfortunately most media and their websites are very biased in left wing and anti-American views. America's new president is causing that to become far more obvious than it ever was. I see that exposure as a good thing because it will show more and more Americans the threat their country faces from within and from abroad.

Dallas Dahms's picture

So true. It's almost like an "idiot roll call" to see this happen, but then as you say, it's a good thing. Now we know where the idiot's voices are coming from.

Dallas Dahms's picture

Totally! I also removed The Verge from my RSS feed yesterday. I really hope I don't have to do the same for Fstoppers.

Lance Bachelder's picture

This is a complete non-story. Why is this on this site - hope this kind of crap doesn't become a regular thing here, I really enjoy the site.

Deleted Account's picture

It is a regular thing already

Dusty Wooddell's picture


filmkennedy's picture

Why on earth is Fstoppers dabbling with these types of "stories" lately? I come here for photography/video news and community-not to get into political nonsense!

So by getting political, how about not following the media bias and calling this "ban" what it is??? A TEMPORARY PAUSE! Obama did this in 2011 with these same 7 countries, Carter did this with Iran in 1980 and where was all the rhetoric back then?
The "Muslim population are at risk from future bans." This isn't a ban on Muslim/Islam! If it was then Indonesia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia (who should be on that list), etc. would be part of the list of countries affected by this.

Anonymous's picture

F-Stoppers is going full on FakeNews propaganda. I'm out.

Jim Tincher's picture


She's a "legal US resident"!!! Complete BS story!!!

Damon Lynch's picture

It's no surprise to me that a bunch of photographers here are so quick to throw one of their fellow photographers under the bus. I doubt a majority of Eman Mohammed's critics could identify many Middle Eastern countries on a map, let alone explain the intricacies of immigration law. I doubt many of her critics are as good a photographer as she is. Sure guys, continue to dish it out to her, and to Fstoppers for daring to share her story. You're so tough and manly.

Steve Urkel's picture

And this is the witch hunt that is going on. Making claims against the invisible crowd that isn't even doing anything they're accused of.

Nobody is attacking the photographer in question. They are questioning why an editorial fits on a site about photography. (And more importantly, is this the direction the site is going because many professional sites lately have been turning into personal blogs)

Peter Brody's picture

@Damon Lynch

What "story" would that be?? She is obviously not affected by the ban!

Once again, she is not affected by the ban!

Damon Lynch's picture

Eman Mohammed is a photographer. This is a news site about photography. And yet somehow in your mind there is no connection between the two. Strange.

Probably you don't give a damn about Eman Mohammed. Maybe the fact that the U.S. forcibly rounded up Japanese Americans and threw them into camps in the not too-distant past isn't worth your time either, despite the fact that your success in photography probably has more than a little to do with Japanese-made cameras.

Why don't you guys have the courage to admit the real issue is you don't _want_ to care about the plight of women like Eman, and being reminded that of that pisses you off?

Peter Brody's picture

War is supposed to be ugly. America also rebuilt Japan after the war and has protected her ever since, so you can thank America too for all those cameras. If WWII was fought in the manner that Westerners like you wish it would have been then the Allies would have lost the war.

Lose the anti-Americanism Damon. That photographer has no "plight." She is unaffected by the ban.

Damon Lynch's picture

You guys are men with such delicate feelings, aren't you? First Steve Urkel complains about a "witch hunt" at the very time permanent residents have been handcuffed and deported. Talk about precious! Oh my gosh Steve, your feelings have been hurt by learning about how the ban has affected a fellow photographer and permanent resident? Shame on you.

As for you Peter, calling critics of the executive order somehow being "anti-American", that's just laughable. The fact is, you're less educated and less worldly than a great many people directly affected by this ban, such as scientists, PhD students at elite universities, highly successful business owners, and more. Moreover, if you fear refugees -- the great majority of whom are women and children -- just be a man and come out and say it instead of hiding behind this "anti-American" rubbish.

Peter Brody's picture

The only "delicate feelings" I see are coming from those people that have responded irrationally to something that doesn't even affect them.

Scientists, PhD students, and highly successful business owners from Libya, Sudan, Somalia, Yemen, Iraq and Iran? Now that's funny. I think America will survive. LOL.

As for my education and success in life, you know nothing about it so you can't claim anything in regards to that as "fact."

Fear refugees? The great majority of whom are women and children? Funny how most videos showing those so-called refugees flooding Europe were mostly men of fighting and raping age. Just ask the 1000+ women assualted in Cologne Germany on the last point.

As for anti-Americanism. It's never been easier to spot, especially amongst foreigners. Trump has been a blessing when it comes to exposing such people and so-called allies. I need to stock up on the popcorn.

user 65983's picture


Damon Lynch's picture

So you know more about immigration law than her lawyer? An interesting claim. In reality you probably know as little about that topic as you know about the Middle East and the history of U.S. intervention in the region, i.e. close to nothing.

user 65983's picture


Damon Lynch's picture

Given what you've written here, I know you're profoundly ignorant about immigration law and about the executive order.

Peter Brody's picture

The president has the authority to bar any immigration that poses a threat to national security in any way. He has that authority.

What foreigners like you can't seem to wrap your head around, because of your anti-Americanism, is that America has no obligation whatsoever to allow anyone to enter the country. The same goes for any other country.

If you were to simply say that you are against nations and borders then your complaining would make more sense. Are you willing to admit that you feel that way? Or do you believe that only America and its borders shouldn't exist?

Again, this is a non-story. The person in the story is unaffected. The same goes for you.

Anonymous's picture

You are overly certain that anyone criticising this is anti-American. It is as if you think anyone criticising this must necessarily be against the USA. That is an uncomfortably extreme position.

I can only hope you don't think domestic critics are un-American.

The person in the story may or may not be unaffected *right now*. But immigration lawyers have been interpreting this broadly to avoid the suffering and harrassment of their clients. CBP has been interpreting it overbroadly, so the advice from immigration lawyers might be correct.

Either way, these are the first few days of the Trump administration and it is already becoming clear that, soon, restrictions will come to all non-naturalised citizens. All immigrants.

There's additional language in the relevant executive order about unified processes that has immigration lawyers very deeply concerned, because it is written overbroadly, and both of the Steves are on record saying that, essentially, they think America's real problem is record high levels of *legal*, not illegal, immigration.

Serious advice now: if you have any non-citizen immigrant friends, advise them to take citizenship if they wish to stay. And in the meantime, advise them to take no US public benefit, monetary or otherwise. No Medicaid even if it's possible. If you sponsor any immigrants, make this even more clear to them.

Semi-serious advice: get over it. A whole lot more is coming. Much more. You're going to read this on a lot more blogs when people use whatever publishing options they have to get their free speech. If you really get stuck, why not drop an email to Breitbart or OANN and ask if they need help running a photography section?

user 65983's picture


Kevin Lane's picture

Please Fstoppers, please loose the idiotic political spin. No one comes here for hit pieces on a politician no matter which side of the isle they sit on.

Jack Alexander's picture


Kevin Lane's picture

Really? Aren't you just fucking brilliant.

Robin Browne's picture

I'm with you Kevin.


So, this woman is afraid of getting out of USA because she fears the risk of not seeing her family again and all this people here think that's stupid and not news worthy. There, right there is the true hell on earth. If the devil exists I think he would be laughing right now watching how so many people disregard humanity so easily.

Thank you Trump.

Peter Brody's picture

Her fears are not based on any facts. They are irrational, as is your determination of everyone's humanity.

Studio 403's picture

Former President Obama had several travel bans for the good of the country. Though somesaid the roll out of Prsident's Trump's ban was awkward, Being 70 yrs of age, not seen so much about nothing except of the TV networks flashing so much drams . Folks who claim "right wing" votes are haters, perhaps would take several selfies and find out what they see. It seems to me a lot of hate going on toward the office of the President. Please slow your shutter down. All the folks who were going to Canada if President Trump won, well folks, nobody has left....Let's not give so much power to the Actor crowd. Please note, they are acting...., be safe and well. Grace of God be with you all

More comments