Immigration

Trump Weaponizes the Bureaucracy Against Naturalized Citizens

|

Parvez Manzoor Khan, a 62-year-old Pakistani truck driver, has lived in the U.S. for nearly three decades. He has an American wife and three American children. In 2006, he became a naturalized U.S. citizen. But Khan is facing "denaturalization" and deportation due to an error of omission on his application for citizenship.

Denaturalization—or stripping naturalized immigrants of their citizenship—is an extreme measure typically reserved for Nazis and terrorists. But in a little-noticed initiative called Operation Second Look, President Donald Trump is rummaging through past naturalization applications looking for reasons to remove the citizenship of nonheinous individuals.

In the early '90s, Khan filed an asylum petition under a different name but missed his asylum hearing. He says his lawyer failed to notify him. Unbeknownst to him, Khan told The Intercept, he was ordered deported in absentia in 1992. The Trump administration now wants to revoke Khan's U.S. citizenship and send him back to Pakistan, not because he poses any kind of a threat but because he failed to note on his citizenship application that he once applied for asylum and was rejected.

Operation Second Look builds on an Obama-era initiative titled Operation Janus, which kicked off in 2008 when immigration authorities discovered that 206 people from "special interest" countries who had been ordered deported later managed to obtain citizenship. Evidently, the government had failed to upload 315,000 files containing immigrants' fingerprints. As a result, it couldn't check naturalization applications against its digital database.

A Department of Homeland Security investigation found that out of all of these files, 815 people who had been ordered deported, and another 953 people flagged due to concerns about immigration fraud and similar issues, got their citizenship.

The Trump administration has put this effort on steroids, referring an additional 1,600 naturalized citizens for possible prosecution in January 2018. It subsequently announced it would comb through 700,000 more files for possible fraud or errors, and it has sought $207.6 million from Congress to expand its denaturalization task force.

The status of naturalized citizens who lose in court reverts to whatever it was before they received citizenship. In the case of those whose asylum petitions were denied, that typically means deportation. That's what Khan is facing.

The federal government has the latitude to rescind citizenship from war criminals and terrorists. It is using this power to strip people of their rights for relatively minor offenses. If the Trump administration succeeds against Khan, the message to 20 million naturalized Americans will be that they are second-class citizens whose status is not fully secure.

NEXT: Brickbat: Time Out

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Parvez Manzoor Khan, a 62-year-old Pakistani truck driver….

    So even you admit he’s not American.

    In the early ’90s, Khan filed an asylum petition under a different name….

    Ilhan Omar? Maybe we should hear a little more about this minor little teeny bureaucratic slip-up of filing under a different name.

    Operation Second Look builds on an Obama-era initiative titled Operation Janus….

    So Trump’s the one weaponizing the bureaucracy, Obama was merely being two-faced.

    ….815 people who had been ordered deported, and another 953 people flagged…. ….The Trump administration has put this effort on steroids, referring an additional 1,600 naturalized citizens for possible prosecution….

    Obama – 1768, Trump – 1600. I’m not sure you know what steroids are.

    It is using this power to strip people of their rights for relatively minor offenses. If the Trump administration succeeds against Khan….

    So Khan hasn’t in fact actually been deported yet, he’s just been stripped of his right to be above the law?

    Is there anything about this article that isn’t twisted?

    1. Shikha left out that Trump was partly elected to hold everyone accountable to the multitude of laws that oppress Americans.

      No more exceptions for Lefties to be above the law.

      I continue to hope that this strategy will cause more and more Americans to demand repealing of more and more laws.

      1. It goes back to something Sessions said in his conformation hearing. When asked by Democrats if he would enforce immigration law, and they were upset when he said yes.

        He pointed out that if they didn’t ‘Ike that, that they were free as legislators to change the law. Of course, Democrats are Marxist trash who pervert the rule of law, and enabled by far too many weak, corrupt RINOs.

      2. Lefties are not above the law. Nice try though.

    2. He is an American, you Trumpista racist FUCK. He was naturalized, he’s a citizen — an American.

      You should light up your tikki torch and march up and down streets with that supid, empty look that only Trumpistas have, chanting “You will not replace us!” because you WILL be replaced —by far better people. You ridiculous Trumpista(*)

      (*)A term of derision which describes an idiot who is easily swayed by the facile demagoguery from a New York con man who can’t even spell his own name correctly.

      1. I just cannot believe there are racists out there who don’t want millions more people like you crossing the US / Mexico border.

        1. perfect.

      2. Shika’s the one who said he was a Pakistani. She could have described him as an American of Pakistani descent or a naturalized American, formerly a citizen of Pakistan. But she described him as a Pakistani, which to most people means “a citizen of Pakistan”.

        Shika should be more careful with her words.

        1. He’s a first generation immigrant. Becoming a US citizen doesn’t erase the ethnicity of his birth.

          1. But he’s American now right, words have meaning and those matter right?

      3. A term of derision which describes an idiot who is easily swayed by the facile demagoguery from a New York con man who can’t even spell his own name correctly.

        So your saying that your a Bloombergista then?

      4. Khan was never lawfully admitted, which is a prerequisite for becoming a naturalized citizen under our immigration laws. He lied about his name and did not bother to show up at his asylum hearing. And it’s your responsibility, not your attorney’s, to show up at the hearing. So, he was never lawfully admitted – therefore, he is not a legal naturalized citizen. Seems pretty clear.

        1. Then they need to go through the courts and make their case before starting the removal process.

      5. He is an American, you Trumpista racist FUCK. He was naturalized, he’s a citizen — an American.

        You should light up your tikki torch and march up and down streets with that supid, empty look that only Trumpistas have, chanting “You will not replace us!” because you WILL be replaced —by far better people. You ridiculous Trumpista(*)

        (*)A term of derision which describes an idiot who is easily swayed by the facile demagoguery from a New York con man who can’t even spell his own name correctly.

        Old Mexican – Mostly dishonest
        Old Mexican – Mostly ignores the plain facts of a case to instead try insulting people with crude and tired insults while sticking to easily refutable talking points and trying to play the Charlottesville card against reasoned arguments
        Old Mexican – Mostly downright nasty, bad faith little Hihnsucker

        1. Old Mexifry is the most racist poster here. And an incredibly dishonest piece of shit. He might be even worse than Jewish holocaust enthusiast Rob Misek.

          1. OMMH (and 20 million of his close friends) had spent much of his life hiding in the shadows to conceal his criminal trespass. His defense, now that the flashlights are shining, is to be angry and belligerent. No legal defense. No moral defense. Just anger. Well, go ahead and express your anger…on your way home.

        2. Now who’s being a dick.

      6. “He is an American, you Trumpista racist FUCK.”

        Not according to Dalmia. Take up your beef with her.

        And if you receive any benefits from performing fraud, you do not get to keep them.

      7. Touched a sore spot with you I see. Are you concerned that they will find your fraudulent application and you will soon be involuntarily making a run for the border?

        I encounter racist roaches like you each and every day. The stench of you and your kind will only be tolerated for so long before the problem is address.

    3. Poor OMMH.

      He was Denaturalized years ago for being a traitor.

      1. I am skeptical of his status as a human too. He might be one of the crab people.

        Crab people………. crab people…………

    4. KHAN!!!!!

      1. A naturalized citizen of Ceti Alpha V.

        1. He might have some wrath issues.

    5. Dalmia weaponized her ignorance and pen against reason and logic.

    6. Jerryskids, you have this 100% correct. If I am late to a hearing I lose my case. If I do not follow the rules of the court, I lose my case. The President is responsible for securing the borders of the confederation of States. His job is to exclude those who did not follow the rules or lied. It is up to to prove they should not be deported. If we don’t like this we can nullify it or change it. CA and other have chosen to nullify immigration laws. If you have a CA license in my State you will come under greater scrutiny since anyone illegal can get a license in CA. this article was not sensible and in no manner describes how a libertarian should look at someone lying to obtain services they otherwise would not be entitled to.

    7. Immigration offenses aren’t minor. And so much for the great vetting of immigrants that we have been repeatedly assured was air tight. We are just now realizing that we don’t really know who the guy is.

    8. hAnnAh. i cAn see whAt your sAying… elizAbeth`s storry is AmAzing… on sundAy i got A brAnd new hondA from eArning $9023 this lAst four weeks And even more thAn 10-k this pAst month. with-out Any doubt it’s the most finAnciAlly rewArding i’ve ever hAd. i stArted this 8-months Ago And pretty much strAight AwAy wAs bringing home over $71… per-hr. i use this greAt link, go to this site home tAb for more detAil…../.morning6.com

  2. If the Trump administration succeeds against Khan, the message to 20 million naturalized Americans will be that they are second-class citizens whose status is not fully secure.

    If the Trump administration succeeds against Khan, the message to resident aliens who lie on their forms will be that they are subject to deportation.

    FTFY.

    1. +1000

    2. But he’s not a resident alien though. He’s a US citizen. There are no classes of US citizen. They don’t come in different levels of validity or equality before the law. You might be able to make the argument that someone became a US citizen through incomplete means or through government incompetence but they are still a full citizen. The constitution doesn’t offer any wiggle room on this.

      Either the constitution means something or it doesn’t.

      1. He was a resident alien. Then lied on his naturalization application. Sorry, but his ass goes back to bumfuckistan.

        1. +100

        2. He wasn’t even legally a resident alien, as he’d skipped the initial asylum hearing and was under a deportation order the whole time. If he had a green card under that third name, it, too, was obtained fraudulently.

          1. The LP seeks to preserve laws against theft, fraud and violence. But the communist anarchists, the ones who call libertarians “statists,” are bound to put together another anarchist party (to replace the ones already hanged) urging uninspected entry, no death penalty, and collectivized gauntlet voting instead of either-or choices. Subscribers are watching their windowpanes for the first issue of Treason® to come flying in–wrapped around a brick.

      2. I am a naturalized citizen. It has always been the case that citizenship can be revoked if it was obtained through fraud. Period.

        Why are you supporting liars and lawbreakers?

        1. I was always curious how many reason commenters are natural born Americans and how many are new to America.

          I think its great that Libertarian principles discussed by commenters are liked by new Americans. In spite of all the Socialist propaganda, ideas of freedoms and Liberty outshine the propaganda.

          1. Hell yeah

        2. Because it’s not morally consistent to say that some lawbreakers can be punished differently than others for the same crimes. Committing fraud is a crime that you can go to jail for. But natural born citizens cannot be deported.

          >Why are you supporting liars and lawbreakers?
          I want this zeitgeist of all-or-nothingism to die. You apparently can’t stand for principles anymore. It must be about picking a team. I am not supporting liars and lawbreakers. I am supporting the fact that being a citizen means being a citizen means being a citizen.

          1. What’s your stance on war criminals who lose their citizenship because of fraud?

        3. I am a naturalized citizen. It has always been the case that citizenship can be revoked if it was obtained through fraud. Period.

          A mistake on a form is not fraud. Missing a hearing because you didn’t know about it is not fraud. Being told the wrong directions by a bureaucrat is not fraud.

          It’s amazing how many so called “libertarians” here will protect an inept government bureaucracy over a human being just trying to live their lives.

          1. Of course he claimed his lawyer mislead him. What’s he going to say? But the guy entered the country on a forged passport, and is currently on his third alias that we know of. What about that history suggests you should believe anything he says?

          2. What part of lying about his name on the form was a “mistake” instead of fraud? So, if I put on my tax form that I had zero income for the year and owe no taxes, will the IRS view this as merely a “mistake” or tax fraud?

          3. Even a shoplifting conviction can be sufficient to prevent someone from obtaining permanent residence and later citizenship.

            Failing to declare the shoplifting conviction is treated just as seriously. It shows the prospective immigrant to be untrustworthy. Why would we want to admit him?

      3. I’m not an immigration attorney, but my guess is there are carve outs for acts of fraud in the naturalization process.

  3. So he lied on his asylum petition, missed his court date, then lied on his citizenship application. Maybe he’s not the best example to use? Or maybe he is.

    Also, “weaponized?” What a fucking joke this trash is.

  4. Perhaps another look at Shikha’s file is in order?

    1. That is what she is scared of.

      No way Shikha wants to go back to live in India. Women are treated like second class citizens and India literally has Second-Class citizens (“Untouchables” too).

      Shikha would be a voice among 1.339 billion, so it would be harder to undermine the USA.

      1. If things are that bad in India, we should invite the entire Indian population to move here.

        1. They can live with Shikha.

          1. Now you’re just being silly. A billion people cannot fit in one house. Too crowded.

            But an extra billion people spread across the entire country? We got plenty of space.

            #OpenBordersWillFixOurLowPopulationDensity

            1. Father wears his Sunday best
              Mother’s tired, she needs a rest
              The kids are playing up downstairs
              Sister’s sighing in her sleep (ah)
              Brother’s got a date to keep, he can’t hang around
              Our house, in the middle of our street
              Our house, in the middle of our
              Our house, it has a crowd
              There’s always something happening
              And it’s usually quite loud
              Our mum she’s so house-proud
              Nothing ever slows her down and a mess is not allowed
              Our house, in the middle of our street
              Our house, in the middle of our
              Our house, in the middle of our street
              Our house, in the middle of our (something tells you that you’ve got to move away from it)
              Father gets up late for work
              Mother has to iron his shirt
              Then she sends the kids to school
              Sees them off with a small kiss (ah)
              She’s the…

              By Madness

      2. I think Shikha is from one of the well-to-do castes which means she would get to tread on people, which doesn’t sound particularly libertarian. I can’t imagine the slumdog classes ever being given the opportunity to come to America and wind up with a sweet gig pushing poorly-argued #resistance word soups for The Week.

        I imagine Shikha, to her credit, probably takes some issue with that caste system, but if so I think that might be the most (only?) libertarian aspect to her output.

    2. Indeed. I advocate for a full review of Dalmia’s immigration file.

      Spare no time or expense!

  5. Sounds like he committed fraud. Doing that for a CDL is a felony, just saying.

    1. Doing that on Form 4473 is also a felony.

    2. But…..but…… he’s an immigrant! They’re better than us, and exempt from our laws!

      1. But…..but…… he’s an immigrant! They’re better than us, and exempt from our laws!

        I would take an immigrant over most commenters here any day of the week. They at least understand hard work, family, and freedom.

        1. Being an immigrant doesn’t inalienable make them hard workers with family and understanding of freedom.

          Actually with up to 80% supporting the “socialist” team – I’d have to say the numbers work against such a blind claim.

        2. May you move out of the US, live with them in their home countries and be surrounded by their goodness!

  6. “Denaturalization—or stripping naturalized immigrants of their citizenship—is an extreme measure typically reserved for Nazis and terrorists. ”

    But poorly defined when one has to specifically name the ideology.

  7. Denaturalization—or stripping naturalized immigrants of their citizenship—is an extreme measure typically reserved for Nazis and terrorists.

    Nobody ever said Denaturalization was reserved for Nazis and terrorists. Congress has exercised its enumerated power and the Executive Branch carries out those laws at its discretion.

    US Const., Article I, Section 8, Clause 4:
    To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;

    1. “Typically” is not synonymous with “exclusively”.

  8. Guys from Pakistan. Wonder if they push this hard if he was from Norway?

    1. Do you ever tire of being a fool?

      1. Literature and legends tells us that fools are often right.

        1. Citation needed.

          Someone cannot tell the difference between fiction and nonfiction.

    2. The US Gov Denaturalized a White dude from Ukraine recently for being an accused Nazi clerk.

      List of denaturalized former citizens of the United States

      Here’s a list, why don’t you give us a run-down of race, ethnicity, and sex.

      1. Note that this is a person accused of being a Nazi. The only thing the truck driver in the story is accused of is being from Pakistan.

        1. No…don’t lie… now. Even Shikha admitted that this Pakistani guy LIED TWICE on official US forms to get access to America.

          1. No, not to get access. There’s no information that says he entered the US illegally. He was likely here legally on a temporary VISA.

            1. “There’s no information that says he entered the US illegally.”

              He entered using a forged passport. Try again.

        2. He is accused of lying on his application.

        3. Note that this is a person accused of being a Nazi.
          But denaturalization wasn’t because he was a Nazi. It was because he lied about being a Nazi on immigration and naturalization forms.
          They still ask the question on the current I-485:

          During the period from March 23, 1933 to May 8, 1945, did you ever order, incite, assist, or otherwise participate
          in the persecution of any person because of race, religion, national origin, or political opinion, in association with either the Nazi government of Germany or any organization or government associated or allied with the Nazi government of Germany?

          1. True. It was the the lying part.

            America admitted multiple Nazis after WWII, like Werner Von Braun….

          2. One less Socialist.

        4. It’s good to know a mere accusation carries so much weight.

          1. He is certainly entitled to due process to contest the accusation. But if the accusation is proven in front of the immigration judge provided for by law, then his naturalization was obtained fraudulently and so is null and void. Which is what seems to have happened here.

    3. Well, maybe he’s one of the Pakistani men who are NOT involved in child sexual assault rings.

      1. Well, now that he’s back in Pakistan he might be involved.

    4. Wonder if they push this hard if he was from Norway?

      Answer: Yes. Particularly if they have terror connections and then lie about them.

      1. Where in the story does it say the Pakistani truck driver has terrorist connections?

        1. He’s Pakistani. Of course, he’s a terrorist of Americans!

    5. The administration is republican, wonder if moderation would make a snarky comment like that if it was democrat.

      1. I would make the same comment for any administration who wants to repatriate a naturalized American citizen who has lived in the country without incident for almost 30 years. Frankly, if the old Nazi was not a war criminal and has he kept out of trouble for 30 years I would let him stay as well. You know 30 years is a long time and I would need a significant reason to boot someone out of the country citizen or not if they had been here that long.

        1. I tend to agree with this. Even if its’ the law, I believe the President has the power to pardon. This is more an example of bureaucracy at work.

  9. This proves the only acceptable immigration policy is open borders. Fortunately Democrats are rapidly embracing the Koch / Reason agenda on this issue. I predict their 2020 nominee will explicitly campaign — and win — on a platform of unlimited, unrestricted immigration.

    #VoteDemocratForOpenBorders

    1. And we’ll give each one a gun of their choice as they enter the country, so they can celebrate their American freedoms the proper way.

  10. “President Donald Trump is rummaging through past naturalization applications looking for reasons to remove the citizenship of nonheinous individuals”

    Where does he find the time?

    1. He lives rent-free in Shikha’s head, so he doesn’t have to otherwise work for a living and can spend his time poring over old immigration papers stored forever in dusty warehouses.

  11. “If the Trump administration succeeds against Khan, the message to 20 million naturalized Americans will be that they are second-class citizens …”

    So they’ll feel like everyone in the midwest whose life has been turned upside down because of all the cheap labor hired and all the manufacturing being outsourced?

    They now feel the same way as the people they replaced?

    1. They should learn to code!

  12. Let’s put this in context.

    “Parvez Manzoor Khan

    Parvez Manzoor Khan aka Mohammad Akhtar and Jaweed Khan, 60, a native of Pakistan, arrived at Los Angeles International Airport on Dec. 7, 1991, bearing a Pakistani passport in the name of Mohammad Akhtar. Immigration officials determined that the photo in the passport had been altered. Khan then applied for asylum, claiming his true name was Jaweed Khan. Khan failed to appear in immigration court and was ordered excluded and deported on Feb. 26, 1992. He subsequently failed to surrender for deportation. After having married a U.S. citizen, Khan, using the alias Parvez Manzoor Khan, was granted permanent resident status in 2001. He naturalized on July 3, 2006. Khan has been residing in Branford, Florida.

    This case was investigated by USCIS and the Civil Division’s Office of Immigration Litigation, District Court Section (OIL-DCS). The case is being prosecuted by Counsel for National Security Aaron Petty of OIL-DCS’s National Security and Affirmative Litigation Unit (NS/A Unit), with support from USCIS Office of the Chief Counsel, Southeast Law Division.”

    So, the guy arrives using a fraudulent passport under one name, when it’s detected claims a second name, is ordered deported but skips town, marries a citizen and gets naturalized under yet another name, and this is your poster boy for inappropriate denaturalization???

    Sounds like a textbook example of naturalization fraud to me.

    1. Well, Shika’s idea of a poster boy. Tells me the problem probably isn’t really a problem.

      1. In Shikha’s world even MS-13 hitmen deserve green cards.

    2. So between 1992 and 2006 he was basically a fugitive from justice, having committed multiple counts of fraud, living as an illegal alien in this country. And we’re supposed to feel sorry for him?

      1. And after 2006, he lived here having committed yet another count of fraud, and his status should nver have been granted int he first place and was only allowed BECAUSE OF HIS FRAUD? Cry me a river. Let him take himself and the Mrs and their spawn to Pakistan. Or, the Mrs can do what a lot of women married to career criminals do, divorce him and move on.

    3. Well, sure, if you’re going to investigate the facts you can make this look bad – everybody knows facts can be used to prove anything that’s even remotely true.

    4. I’ve seen hundreds of these cases, but this one is especially egregious. However, the guy could adopt another alias, buy a subscription, and become an anonymous whining sockpuppet for initiation of force in the Reason commentariat–assuming he hasn’t already.

      1. Heck, he could be one that babble incessantly about 1932 and violently masturbates to medical videos of partial birth abortions.

        Right Senior Phillips?

    5. Yeh not a good example.

      That’s why they use, with some validity (some I say) ‘he’s been here 30 years!’ angle.

    6. If this guy has been an honest productive person I have no problem living next door to him. But this is clearly straightforward fraud. To blame Trump for enforcing immigration law that Congress passed before he took office is just silly. And considering the fact that his immigration enforcement to date closely mirrors that of his predecessors, including the chosen one, Reason beclowns itself by publishing this crap. We need an honest dialogue about immigration. Shikha is not acting in good faith.

  13. Lawyer fucked him over – I feel ya Khan. We need truck drivers, and we need tax payers. I know nothing about the process; don’t they have some sort of appeals court where you can wheel in the Mrs., two sobbing kids, a letter from your employer, and 20 years of 1099s and ask for a second chance?

    1. we need tax payers

      Nah. “We” aren’t all slavers.

    2. In this case, even though it sounds like he committed fraud and there’s the possibility his lawyer screwed him, maybe the U.S. can show some mercy here consisting he’s been in the USA for three decades. Maybe make him pay a fine, be on some sort of secret probation and move on to more (recent) flagrant abuses and law breaking.

    3. Yes, there is such a process.

    4. “”Lawyer fucked him over “”

      Being that he lied twice about his name, I doubt his lawyer story.

      1. Yeah, if you lie to your lawyer and don’t show up for court dates, he’s not going to be very fond of you.

  14. I am a naturalized citizen. Not worried at all. Why? Because I didn’t attempt to defraud the government in the process of becoming a citizen.

    1. Mic drop.

    2. +100

      You are the kind of people that we want here in the USA.

      Immigration rule following and actually like America.

    3. My son in law is an immigrant, just got his green card.

      He did everything by the book, including quitting a job because he found out he couldn’t work at that type of job under his student visa and he didn’t want to jeopardize his status.

      I have zero sympathy for illegals, and I suspect he doesn’t either.

      1. Spock….my wife is a naturalized citizen. She played by the rules. She (and I) have ZERO sympathy for people who break the rules, and even less for illegal aliens.

        1. This is why Trump’s anti-illegal immigration rhetoric doesn’t cost him much support among Latino voters: a good chunk of them played by the rules, and it’s infuriating for them to watch illegals get rewarded for breaking them.

          If you were to poll only legal immigrants and naturalized citizens I suspect you’d find a strong majority of them are Trump supporters.

        2. My wife, too. Really, I don’t know of any naturalized aliens, (And I’ve met a lot of them.) who have any tolerance for illegal aliens. “Line jumpers” is the kindest thing they’ll call them, and usually much worse.

          1. Yep. People who do the labor offended by people who think they have a right to the same without the labor. Who would have thunk it?

      2. This is the part ‘open borders’ types conveniently overlook.

        The millions of people who do it the proper and legal way. It’s not, by the sounds of it, a quick and easy route but they dutifully and respectfully follow the process and the law.

        Flashing a sign that says ‘no one is illegal’ or handing them free driver’s licenses and education is not only ridiculously stupid it completely insults immigrants who followed the law and law abiding taxpayers.

        Call me old fashioned but if you’re first step into entering a nation is to break its basic immigration laws, you’re off to a bad start.

        It would be nice if they’d stop conflating being against illegal immigration with being anti-immigration.

    4. It’s pretty funny how the some of the loudest advocates for government authoritarianism are recent immigrants. Are you from Brazil? Just curious. If you want to pay for this police force why don’t you pay more in taxes, immigrant?

      1. Doesn’t that kind of conflict with your narrative that 10 million illegal beaners are going to save the USA from its conservative Boomer overlords Tony, you poor AIDS-ridden faggot?

  15. I’m reminded of an essay I read several years back, on the topic of why BLM was picking Colin Ferguson and Trayvon Martin as their poster boys, instead of, say, Eric Garner.

    The thesis was that organizations like BLM institutionally benefit from conflict and opposition, they need their members feeling oppressed and threatened. If they were to pick a poster boy for their cause that everybody could agree had been subject to injustice, they might advance the cause, but they wouldn’t advance the conflict.

    I suspect something similar is going on here. Perhaps they could find somebody who was unjustly targeted for denaturalization, and get people to agree with them, and clean up the system so that fewer injustices were perpetrated. But would that advance their real goal, de-legitimizing the very concept of citizenship? No, it wouldn’t, it would merely cure some “petty” injustice, and what’s the point of that?

    1. Probably something to that. Conflict can bring in more fundraising dollars and power than solutions.

      Same thing about ending ~99% of drug violence which supposedly is what Drug Warriors want. Legalizing drugs would end ~99% of all violence relating to drugs. Notice Democrats and Republicans wont do that because there is too much money and power wrapped up in the War on Drugs.

      1. Hilary told us there was too much money in the WOD to end it. And she was right. MJ legalisation simply changes the extraction of wealth from the criminal justice system to the tax system. But the right people will still get paid. They always get paid.

    2. At this point, I figured it was just MO.

      The story on Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown gets donation dollars in the door. The story on Eric Garner’s family’s settlement convinces the existing donors that something worthwhile is being done with their money. Lobbying organizations have been playing this game for decades and longer.

  16. I get that you guys are all enjoying the back and forth about whether a guy who’s lived here for a couple of decades apparently as a productive member of society should be tossed out of the country, but you are missing the story…

    The government wants another $200 million dollars to comb through records of citizens, looking for mistakes so they can un-citizen them. Two. Hundred. Million.

    And we don’t think we could do a better job of prioritizing where we spend our “keep the dirty foreigners out” money?

    1. This guy wasn’t a citizen by “mistake”. He committed fraud.

      If you let people keep things they obtain by fraud, you encourage fraud.

      1. Note that Cyto only suggested we better prioritize where address fraud. We could for example start with the Trump organization. We might find more there than in the naturalization files.

        1. Citation needed.

          Lefties comb thru everything Trump and still have never found anything illegal. But YOU will…yeah right.

        2. “”We could for example start with the Trump organization. “”

          So you want to dig for something, but ignore it when you actually have found it?

        3. Trump has been audited over a dozen times and his organization has been probed by multiple grand juries in hostile districts without a single civil or criminal charge being filed, Tony, you poor AIDS-ridden faggot.

    2. Can’t argue with your logic. But that wasn’t the point of the article. I think people are responding to Shikha’s plaintive bleating above. But your point is well taken.

    3. Yea, well, we just shit away $400 million dollars in the blink of an eye to the Ukrainians . . .

      But, I get it, no amount of money is worth allocating toward ensuring the integrity of American citizenship.

  17. > President Donald Trump is rummaging through past naturalization applications looking for reasons to remove the citizenship of nonheinous individuals.

    First ther said they were only against *illegal* immigration, but then pointed at all immigrants. Now that they say they’re only against all *immigrants*, they’re pointing at actual US Citizens.

    When will it stop? Will it stop at the point of loyalty oaths? Who the fuck gave Trump the right to deport US citizens on his say so?

    1. Chill, dude. Only fraudulent applications for citizenship are being pursued.

      Naturalized citizens who obtained their citizenship without fraud cannot be deported afterwards, even if they commit crimes after obtaining citizenship.

    2. “Who the fuck gave Trump the right to deport US citizens on his say so?”

      Congress and its Constitutionally provided powers over naturalization?

    3. First ther* said they were only in favor of legal immigration, but then pointed to child rape slave smugglers. Now that ther* say they’re only in favor of all *immigrants*, they’re pointing at fraudulent green card applicants who committed a felony and lied.

      When will it stop? Will it stop at the point where they stop the histrionic tantrum throwing long enough to properly spell*?

    4. It will stop when they’ve imported enough non-Americans that the Americans are effectively outnumbered, and not before.

  18. “”But Khan is facing “denaturalization” and deportation due to an error of omission on his application for citizenship.””

    I’m pretty sure Captain Kirk is behind this.

  19. Shiksa you ignorant slut…

  20. The real incentive for articles like this one is to try to drum up support to end any review of immigration practices over the past few decades because everyone within the legacy INS and modern DHS is well aware that fraud has been rampant.

  21. I would think someone writing for a libertarian magazine would know the difference between an immigrant that is doing things the legal way vs. abusing the system by lying and fraud.

    You know, actually use reason when examining the issue.

    1. They don’t really use reason anymore. It’s depressing listening to the roundtable podcasts and only hearing Gillespie (who I still think is significantly left-biased) be the only one willing to entertain different angles. It’s sad how the others dogpile the moment he suggests orange man or R’s aren’t so bad. He is the only editor there who seems to have the latent capacity to use reason to make arguments.

  22. If the bureaucracy can’t be weaponized, why have it?

  23. The thrill that Shikha might have found something meaningful to whine about didn’t last. Her article is as idiotic as any pro-invader screed advanced on Last Week Today. To dues-paying members of the libertarian party running candidates eager to take a constitutional oath for office, her presence at Reason–once a nuisance–is now becoming an affront. The woman cannot hold a thought in her mind other than that the entire population of Pakistan, South America, whatever, is entitled to float ashore and make demands. Salon needs her skills. The NYT can hire her, but frankly she is a nuisance and a liability despite the amusing fact that mystical conservatives hate her. They hate everyone.

  24. Look at all the libertarians who want the government boot stamp all over the face of poor people looking to improve their life. I guess to be a member of the Libertarian Club it’s probably better if you’re White, rich and we’ll-connected.

    1. Poor people don’t improve my life, speak for yourself “libertarian.”

      1. They don’t?!? You’re doing it wrong then.

      2. You don’t improve my life. Deport yourself.

        1. I didn’t break the law to obtain citizenship.

    2. Oh Tony you poor AIDS-ridden faggot.

  25. VHERE ARE YOU’RE PAPERS, BROWN PERSON?

  26. “special interest” countries

    Out of curiosity, anybody know what the majority religion of these “special interest” countries is?

  27. Slightly OT:

    JOHN! ASARRRGGHHH!!! WTF, MAN!!! DEEP STATE REPUBLICANS TOO {SCREAM} AAARRRHGGGHG!!! So scared, John.

    Republican Sen. John Kennedy on Monday backtracked on claims he made a day earlier that no one can be sure it was only Russia that tried to interfere in the 2016 presidential election, saying he misunderstood the question and that he sees no evidence that Ukraine participated in the hacking.

    “I was wrong,” Kennedy told CNN’s Chris Cuomo on “Cuomo Prime Time.” “It was Russia who tried to hack the (Democratic National Committee) computer. I’ve seen no indication that Ukraine tried to do it.”

    1. >>Kennedy told CNN’s Chris Cuomo

      the stupid interviewing the dumb.

    2. Poor Fredo at Fredo Prime Time.

    3. Oh Tony you poor AIDS-ridden faggot.

  28. Even if someone opposes immigration restrictions (a fair libertarian position), one ought to condemn a Shikha article on principle. This one has no shortage of her usual dishonesty.

    One wonders if she remains employed simply as a foil.

    1. She’s here to bodily drag the Overton window leftwards; After exposure to her, merely semi-insane left-wingery is supposed to look more reasonable.

      1. Shikha is a self-proclaimed “progressive libertarian”.

        Though as a progressive, isn’t she supposed to like the rule of the bureaucrats?

  29. “Baboo! Wheels are in motion, Baboo!”

    Too soon?

    1. You’re a very bad man, Jerry. A very bad man.

  30. send him to Ceti Alpha V

    1. I hear they have open planets and open borders.

  31. We still pretending that the core domestic policy objective of Donald Trump doesn’t come from the neo-Nazis he employs for the sole purpose of cleansing the American gene pool of swarthy people?

    1. Nothing tastier than the tears of Anti-American racebaiting vermin.

      But speaking of swarthy …

      Observations Concerning the Increase of Mankind, Ben Franklin:
      … And in Europe, the Spaniards, Italians, French, Russians and Swedes, are generally of what we call a swarthy Complexion; as are the Germans also, the Saxons only excepted, who with the English, make the principal Body of White People
      https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-04-02-0080

  32. Ridiculous article. Just a questionable anecdotal case to support its major assertion. The evidence for the anecdote comes from The Intercept, a far left source. Khan was ordered deported in absentia. Unless Khan got this order overturned, he should not have been granted citizenship. Trump is following the law. Case closed.

  33. More power to Trump for taking on these globalist heathens.

  34. The Left illegally invades the country.
    The Right legally removes the invaders.

    Trump: They have to go.
    https://youtu.be/EBxFVgRBqqc

  35. So what is the man’s real name? The name under which he applied for asylum, or the name he used in his immigration application, or is he someone else entirely. At this point we don’t really know who he is do we.

  36. OK, we get it. Shikha Dalmia hates Trump, but calling enforcement of laws that are on the books that he had nothing to do with passing is not “weaponizing the bureaucracy”. It’s called “faithfully executing the laws” and it is an obligation under the oath he took. It is the constant stream of lies and misrepresentations in reports like this that undermine the credibility of all media. Please stop it.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.