If the argument was restricted to a claim that the technical details of the ban should be slightly different, you might have a point. But the Constitution is n

If the argument was restricted to a claim that the technical details of the ban should be slightly different, you might have a point. But the Constitution is not a suicide pact. Something along these lines has been compelled by geopolitical game theory for years, as soon as it became clear that the preferred no-retaliation tactic was not going to work here. Laws will be updated as necessary to adapt to the strategic imperative. As a Chinese person, I'll take this over internment camps any day of the week. edit: To downvoters: I lived and worked in Shenzhen and Beijing in 2011-12. I aspired to do work there that was useful to humanity as a whole, both inside and outside of China, and it was already perfectly obvious then that I'd need to make use of my work not require any trust in the Chinese government. Not because of an existing law, but because of common sense regarding how much the rest of the world was going to continue putting up with. So I open-sourced everything that mattered, and that work did in fact go on to become trusted by professionals on both sides of the Great Firewall. Perhaps I'm still setting an unreasonable standard, but it's not one that I didn't try to meet myself.