Trump Is Explicitly Targeting Legal Residents Based on the Opinions They Express
The rationale for deporting Mahmoud Khalil is chillingly vague and broad.

Although Mahmoud Khalil is a legal permanent resident of the United States, the Trump administration says, he is "subject to removal" because Secretary of State Marco Rubio "has determined" that his "presence or activities" would "have serious adverse foreign policy consequences." That vague rationale, which alludes to Khalil's participation in anti-Israel protests as a graduate student at Columbia University, is an open-ended license to expel any of the 13 million people who share his immigration status when they engage in controversial speech.
Khalil, who was arrested in New York City on March 8 and taken to a detention center in Louisiana, has no criminal record, and the Trump administration does not claim he has broken any law. Rather, he has been deemed deportable because of his perceived "support" for Hamas, the terrorist organization that set off the war in Gaza by invading Israel on October 7, 2023.
President Donald Trump, who described Khalil as "a Radical Foreign Pro-Hamas Student," said his detention was "the first arrest of many to come." Students at universities across the country "have engaged in pro-terrorist, anti-Semitic, anti-American activity," he said, and "the Trump Administration will not tolerate it."
Trump promised to "find, identify, and deport these terrorist sympathizers from our country." If "you support terrorism, including the slaughtering of innocent men, women, and children," he warned, "your presence is contrary to our national and foreign policy interests, and you are not welcome here."
Whether Khalil actually qualifies as a "terrorist sympathizer" is a matter of dispute. His lawyers say he "has called Israel's actions in Gaza a genocide and characterized the United States as financing and facilitating such violence." But Jewish friends who oppose his detention insist he is not remotely antisemitic and favors a peaceful resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Khalil nevertheless played a prominent role as a negotiator for Columbia University Apartheid Divest, which supports "liberation by any means necessary, including armed resistance," and has celebrated the barbaric attack that started the Gaza war. The group went so far as to retract an apology for the comments of a student protester who said, during a disciplinary hearing, that "Zionists don't deserve to live," adding, "Be grateful that I'm not just going out and murdering Zionists."
Even such abhorrent rhetoric, however, is protected by the First Amendment, which draws no distinction between citizens and other legal residents. "Once an alien lawfully enters and resides in this country," Supreme Court Justice Frank Murphy observed in a 1945 concurring opinion, "he becomes invested with the rights guaranteed by the Constitution to all people within our borders," including "the right to free speech and free press."
That case involved a legal U.S. resident from Australia who was threatened with deportation based on the allegation that he had been affiliated with the Communist Party. As Khalil's lawyers note, several federal courts have applied the principle that Murphy enunciated, holding that "the First Amendment protects noncitizens who are detained and threatened with deportation as a result of their protected speech."
In 2019, for example, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit said even an immigrant with a criminal record that made him deportable had a valid First Amendment objection when he argued that his removal had been fast-tracked in retaliation for his criticism of U.S. immigration policies and practices. Khalil, by contrast, has not been charged with any crime.
The Trump administration instead is relying on a provision that it reads as authorizing deportation of legal permanent residents whose speech relates to foreign policy in a way that the government deems contrary to the national interest. Khalil made himself deportable by "put[ting] himself in the middle" of "basically pro-Palestinian activity," says Deputy Homeland Security Secretary Troy Edgar.
The administration, in short, is explicitly targeting people based on the opinions they express, with the avowed goal of discouraging speech that offends federal officials. Yet Rubio improbably insists "this is not about free speech."
© Copyright 2025 by Creators Syndicate Inc.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
"subject to removal" because Secretary of State Marco Rubio "has determined" that his "presence or activities" would "have serious adverse foreign policy consequences." That vague rationale,
I'm just glad four separate quotes interrupted by the author's words in between each one in a single sentence isn't vague. I'm not sure what to call something like that, but it wouldn't be "vague".
Good for him?
Journalistic malpractice or twisting his words to suit a narrative would be my interpretation of Jacob's actions.
I posted this on another website that has “cerebral intelligencia”. I’m leaving it in for those lurking amongst the fuckwits.
Khalil’s published statement says it all.
He is at the centre of change not because he just complained on obscure websites, or bragged to other of what he has read or written.
The cerebral intelligencia will pontificate lifetimes away on in the hopes of attaining “relevance” or “likes”, while doers in activism, psychology and medical science try to actually improve life.
He stood up like a man for his constitutional rights that authorities have been coercing people to abdicate.
Get that? HE DID SOMETHING and is having a real effect on international news and our global understanding of this dark time in history.
HE IS INSPIRING people to ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING.
But not the “cerebral intelligencia”here so much.
I think the best part is Sullum's determination to continue to beclown himself on this issue.
Rubio lays it out perfectly clearly: If he'd said he was going to do this when he applied for a Green Card it would've been denied.
Honestly, at this point, I'm almost of the mind that lots of print journalism is dead and we're getting the guttural "BRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAINS!" utterances.
Eric and Jacob seems to be in the same type of competition as sarc and Jeff are. Who is the most dishonest retard.
JS;dr
Don't be unfair. Ilya over on Volokh is even worse than those two. He has the type of idiocy that can only be explained by higher education.
high likelihood Eric & Jacob are sarc & jeff
Exactly. He made legally binding representations to get that green card, and then instantly violated them, leading to a presumption he obtained it on false pretenses.
"It's terrible that Trump and Rubio are following the blackletter law, because they're using that law to turf out someone who supports the murder of millions of Jews and the violent destruction of Western Civilization, which are things I also support." --JS
You're right that there is nothing vague in the actual government document - the notice to appear - that provides the reason the govt asserts is the basis for his deportation. From the NTA document
4. The Secretary of State has determined that your presence or activities in the United States would have serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States.
(preprinted on the form itself) On the basis of the foregoing, it is charged that you are subject to removal from the United States pursuant to the following provisions of law:
Section 237 (a) (4) (C) (i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, as amended, in that the Secretary of State has reasonable ground to believe that your presence or activities in the United States would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States.
So you are correct there is nothing vague about the details of what the government is doing. What is vague is what exactly are the serious adverse foreign policy consequences that allow the SecyState to have someone expelled from the US SOLELY ON HIS SAY SO.
The Secy State is not alleging a crime here (eg funding Hamas which would be a crime for Khalil - but not for Netanyahu). The specific provision cited is almost certainly unconstitutional (for violation of due process) based on a SC case from 100 years ago.
But regardless - what EXACTLY are the serious adverse foreign policy consequences here? Of some college students protesting?
This is not about Hamas at all. Or aout college protests. It is about the BDS campaign. It is no accident that Rubio has been the primary mover for a federal anti-BDS law for a long time. That's the mission of the organization that Khalil has been involved with. Anti-BDS laws have passed in 38 states - despite overwhelming opposition from voters who are told what happened. Because there is something really unAmerican about being told that you cannot make your own boycott or investment choices.
THAT is what this case is about. To eliminate the voice of Palestinians who might try to persuade Americans of what is happening so that they might choose to boycott or divest on their own or tell their pols to stop funding.
^^Spot on ^^
Sullum is fully with Hamas.
I see Reason has dropped their “poor innocent college student being torn away from his pregnant wife by Orangemanbad” and have pivoted to…whatever the fuck they’ve pivoted to.
Y'know, it's one thing to say, "I support the LGBT." I get that. Awful, but that's free speech.
It's a whole other thing to support the LGBT by actively filming and distributing child pornography.
Which is effectively what this Hamastinian terrorist did. There's a discernable difference between "having opinions" and "enabling violence." I know the whole point of Reason's pro-terrorism/Islam pro-Death To America/Death to the Great Satan campaign is to pretend otherwise, but your sane readers are NOT going to let you pretend otherwise.
Even such abhorrent rhetoric, however, is protected by the First Amendment, which draws no distinction between citizens and other legal residents.
I know you think this is libertarian, but it's not. Want to prove me wrong? Give me your email and residential address. I will go the distance to send you a daily reminder of how I'm going to rape you, your fat bald not-a-journalist girlfriend, and your trans children in the face every single day, Jacob. I won't actually do any of that, because I'm not the kind of monster you'd like to empower to do so - I'm just going to exercise my free speech every day with my overt threats to you and yours. Because that's what free speech is about. Threatening others with torture and murder.
Right?
Right Jacob? Give me your address so I can send you a few first amendment pipe bombs. They're just confetti. Don't worry. But celebrate my right to have something explode on your porch, you stupid ignorant douche bag. Give me your libertarian creds vis a vis your physical address Jacob. I've got SO MANY free speech unmarked totally harmless packages to send you.
"I know the whole point of Reason's pro-terrorism/Islam pro-Death To America/Death to the Great Satan campaign is to pretend otherwise...."
You've become hysterical. Islam doesn't mean death to the US. Hamas attacked Israel, not the US, after being funded by Israel, not the US. We'll be OK.
"Give me your email and residential address. I will go the distance to send you a daily reminder of how I'm going to rape you, your fat bald not-a-journalist girlfriend, and your trans children in the face every single day, Jacob."
Good! I get your points, your point slandering anyone who cares about Muslims being killed and the point you want us to believe you are making, that defending free speech means defending threats of torture and murder, so good, keep making it obvious.
Islam explicity calls for its followers to torture and kill non muslims
And the Bible specifically endorses Jewish genocide of neighboring tribes they want to conquer, including slaughtering every living man, woman and child. See Deuteronomy 20. Many Americans and Israelis nonetheless purport to cherish the sacredness of this "holy scripture."
You left out the part where Israel was required to give warning to those who opposed them. But sure, go and twist the narrative of their wars to support your antisemitic views.
You dont think they'd do similar in America if they thought they were strong enough or could get away with it?... Islam doesnt see their society as on an equal footing with the west - they see theirs as superior and feel they have a holy mission to make it a world view - with or without the assent of the governed.
(His vitriol does help to get the point across though it does come across as a bit over the top.)
Islam means submit. Its followers take that as death to all non muslims and those who do muslim wrong.
They won’t all necessarily kill you if you pay the jizya (tax non-believers pay for the privilege of living). But it’s pretty clear the Palestinians won’t give you that option.
We talking about the Palestinians that were dancing in the streets on 9/11 backed by Iran and their declaring America is the great Satan and chanting death to America? Yeah, I'm sure they have nothing but our wellbeing in mind.
You've become hysterical. Islam doesn't mean death to the US.
You've become retardedly illiterate. AT doesn't say Islam is the one that wants to destroy the US, he asserts that Reason does. Further, his explicit example has nothing to do with Islam. It's about threats and calls to violence.
I get your points
No, you don't. To the detriment of everyone... readers, commenters, writers, Americans, immigrants, Muslims, Jews... involved.
Not all the Palestinians killed were Muslims, the two are rather explicitly not synonymous. It's a title of convenience. Same with Israel. The distinction is, AT opposes the calls to violence and you're, either retardedly or dishonestly, obfuscating to perpetuate it. You don't want the dying to stop. You want one side to win outright based on your own even more arbitrary notion of self-righteousness. If 100M Israelis *and* Muslims have to die in order to vindicate and liberate Kahlil and set the US on some Golden Path of free speech, that's what you're advocating.
Otherwise, the US deports, denies, and revokes Green Cards of people for all kinds of far more mundane causes all the time and you're just fundamentally ignorant, if not brutally stupefied by the world around you, and compensate by doing the same to others.
Missed all those American hostages I guess.
Khalil is a member of -- possibly holds a leadership position in -- an organization which calls for the violent overthrow of Western Civilization. This goes well beyond Israel.
You’re ignorant of Islam.
You're ignorant.*
You are weapons grade retarded. Islam calls for death or subjugation of all non-Muslims.
Hamas murdered many Americans on 10/7 and took many more as hostages. They are bloodthirsty Islamists and must be exterminated.
So really, fuck the Muslims, and fuck this terrorist that should never have been allowed into the US in the first place.
As long as you don't hold yourself as an example of a sane reader. I'm afraid you've demonstrated that not to be the case.
You are mistaken. Read mad.casual's post above.
Do not support the immigration of violent people.
"Release Mahmoud Khalil"
We ARE releasing him... back to the place he ran away from.
Damn straight. This whole thing has had the benefit of making the general public hate the de o rats more than ever.
And that’s saying a lot considering their current polling. NBC will helpfully explain that Democrat unpopularity is due to not fighting Trump hard enough:
https://youtu.be/casMMD0GfWg
They really are doubling down on their TDS based delusions.
JS;dr
VD;dr. VD (Venereal Disease) is some BAD shit! Go see the Dr. if you've got the VD!!! THAT is why I say VD;dr.!!!
JS;dr isn't strong enough. I have moved to JS;dc (JacoBoehm SullEmma; don't click). They'd be a little too left and one-note at a (outwardly) left-wing publication. That they run here is a joke, and will only stop if they stop getting hate clicks.
I get that the comments are fun, but we are providing these lying, lazy shitbags with a living by clicking on their poorly constructed propaganda. I will choose to sit it out going forward.
Whether Khalil actually qualifies as a "terrorist sympathizer" is a matter of dispute.,
Only to people committed to ignoring the facts. In reality he joined an organization whose mission is the "eradication of Western Civilization" and which openly supports terrorism around the world to achieve that mission.
Khalil is of course free to argue otherwise.
He is also free to ask the Supreme Court to overrule Harisiades v. Shaughnessy, 342 U.S. 580 (1952).
He's free to do so...from Algeria.
He should be glad he isn't being sent to El Salvador.
True. It’s more a matter of casual observation. And only people like JeffSarc believe otherwise.
None of his defenders would let him within a mile of their child esp if that child even looks Jewish. So I call them all hypocrites.
HAMAS CHARTER (1988)
Excerpts from the Hamas Charter, 1988, is a call for genocide against all Jews, worldwide, although special attention is paid to Israel. The belief that Israel doesn't deserve to exist, and that Jews don't deserve to live is the foundation of Palestinian resistance
On the destruction of Israel:"Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it." (Preamble)
Support such people and you are an enemy of the UNITED STATES.
JS;too stupid
Hence my JS;tr
*tr: too retarded
Any time something is described by a Treasonista (including jeffsarc) as “vague”, you know it is extremely clear
Just like when a Democrat says, "Let me be clear ...", you are about to get a load of piss down your back.
Yup, start off with the least pleasant and most despicable individuals to get the people comfortable with the idea that it's fine for the Executive to go against the Constitution "in the national interest"
How would deporting Khalil be against the Constitution?
Shrikes British sock has never read that document.
Because it would hurt his feelings.
Nah. It's because I'm not an authoritarian e-thug.
Read Harisiades v. Shaughnessy. Don't need to be "an authoritarian e-thug" to understand deporting avowed enemies isn't authoritarian.
Due process violation.
You can't just deport people on Executive say-so, even if they're not citizens.
Actually, according to law --- yeah, you can.
"Actually"...
Nope. I know you want this to be true but it isn't.
In reality it has always been the case that visa, greencard, and immigration applicants were warned that political statements could result in their deportation. Leftists accepted this for normals, they only challenged it when it was used to deport a terrorist supporter.
I can't figure out why terrorism supporters deserve such special treatment.
And in reality they would get a hearing to confirm.
https://www.usa.gov/deportation-process
Apparently Trump/DOGE haven't yet scrubbed this page, but "I'm sure that it will happen.
Why are you so stupid as to think that everyone who want the law to be followed are lefists? Suyrely there are still some right-wingers who think the law should be followed, as well as centrists, libertarians, etc.
Why are you so stupid as to think that everyone who want the law to be followed are lefists?
As I already demonstrated you don't want the law to be followed, you want to change the law specifically to protect terrorist supporters from being deported.
And in reality they would get a hearing to confirm.
Sullum isn't arguing they should get a hearing, he's arguing these circumstances do not justify deportation.
As I already demonstrated you don't want the law to be followed, you want to change the law specifically to protect terrorist supporters from being deported.
You're a fucking liar. I am happy for terrorist supporters to be deported but I want the determination that they are terrorist supporters to be made by an independent judiciary - per the law, not just by Executive fiat.
Shrike continues to want to be in jeffsarcs retard club.
Even Ilya Somin conceded that there is a statutory basis for these deportation proceedings.
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title8-section1182&num=0&edition=prelim
Any alien who-
(I) has engaged in a terrorist activity;
(II) a consular officer, the Attorney General, or the Secretary of Homeland Security knows, or has reasonable ground to believe, is engaged in or is likely to engage after entry in any terrorist activity (as defined in clause (iv));
(III) has, under circumstances indicating an intention to cause death or serious bodily harm, incited terrorist activity;
(IV) is a representative (as defined in clause (v)) of-
(aa) a terrorist organization (as defined in clause (vi)); or
(bb) a political, social, or other group that endorses or espouses terrorist activity;
(V) is a member of a terrorist organization described in subclause (I) or (II) of clause (vi);
(VI) is a member of a terrorist organization described in clause (vi)(III), unless the alien can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that the alien did not know, and should not reasonably have known, that the organization was a terrorist organization;
(VII) endorses or espouses terrorist activity or persuades others to endorse or espouse terrorist activity or support a terrorist organization;
(VIII) has received military-type training (as defined in section 2339D(c)(1) of title 18) from or on behalf of any organization that, at the time the training was received, was a terrorist organization (as defined in clause (vi)); or
(IX) is the spouse or child of an alien who is inadmissible under this subparagraph, if the activity causing the alien to be found inadmissible occurred within the last 5 years,
is inadmissible. An alien who is an officer, official, representative, or spokesman of the Palestine Liberation Organization is considered, for purposes of this chapter, to be engaged in a terrorist activity.
These folks need to realize going to the mat for every single person makes the complaints less respected.
And you fascists need to realise that we don't want the Executive to decide that they can deport who they want without checks to ensure that they're not just deporting people for whimsical political reasons, revenge, etc.
But you love the Fuhrerprinzip, don't you?
There is a clear statutory basis for this deportation proceeding.
Immigration is a lottery followed by an audition; he failed the audition. Next in line, please.
Kill all the jews that is like, your opinion, man.
Several people on here have expressed the view that all the left-wingers are literally cancer and should be killed. And unless they are planning to go do it themselves, that is just their opinion, man.
Now, I don't know what all this asshole got up to. If there is some actual incitement or other crimilaity, then fine. But if all he was doing was expressing political views, even if they are ones I find abhorrent, I don't like that as grounds for deportation. I don't really know and I can't be bothered to find out more about this particular case. Doesn't matter what I think about it, they're going to do what they're going to do.
They are citizens.
He is not.
Differences.
Yes, that is a difference. But 1st amendment rights aren't limited to US citizens. AS I have said, if he was doing things not protected by the 1st (which seems fairly likely from what I have seen, then go for it.
Khalil lied when filling out his immigration application form. That's grounds for deportation.
Then let a judge determine that this is indeed the case, not rely on a "trust me" from the Executive.
Sullum must of pulled 'explicity' and 'vague' from the Sarctonary: A Box of Drunken Malapropisms for this article.
Confused why Reason columnists support genocide of the Jews and the terrorists that promote the genocide.
Kahlil is much more complicit than a vast majority of J6 (people persecuted "based on the opinions they express."
Administration/application of US Immigration law is, in general, conducted with "vague and broad" interpretation. So, there's that.
"Although Mahmoud Khalil is a legal permanent resident of the United States, the Trump administration saysEditSign, he is "subject to removal" because Secretary of State Marco Rubio "has determined" that his "presence or activities" would "have serious adverse foreign policy consequences." That vague rationale, which alludes to Khalil's participation in anti-Israel protests as a graduate student at Columbia University, is an open-ended license to expel any of the 13 million people who share his immigration status when they engage in controversial speech."
Yup.
Full Stop.
It also came out his application was also fraudulent for his green card.
Trump Is Explicitly Targeting Legal Residents Based on the Opinions They Express
You mean's finally going after BLM rioters and the "mostly peaceful" and the even less respectable "Those people (who live there) shouldn't have been there." mouthpieces that supported them?
Like the boy who dishonestly cried wolf, you retards have been tearing at the good faith social fabric that keeps the wolves from eating you for years. Now that it's finally frayed and the wolves have eaten all the sheep, you're surprised to discover that the wolves don't respect the inherent superiority of the shepherds, and just spontaneously construct the diverse, social equity libertopia you had envisioned.
Fuck Around. Find Out.
Keep it up, you are destroying REASON
He was the spokesman of a pro-Hamas student group called Columbia University Apartheid Divest. CUAD has referred to the Oct. 7 slaughter of Israelis as a "moral, military, and political victory" and asserted that it is fighting for nothing less than the "total eradication of Western civilization."
This is like a jailbreak where your rescuers shoot you to death as soon as you get outside.
BOASBERG is guiltier than even Trump said !!!
https://www.wnd.com/2025/03/trump-pushes-to-impeach-troublemaker-judge-as-major-conflict-of-interest-is-discovered/
"The rationale for deporting Mahmoud Khalil is chillingly vague and broad"
Sullum and the people who pay him for this, really think you're all retarded.
Also, how much longer until the Democratic Party kidnaps some Jewish children to exchange with Trump for Khalil.
I'm not chilled. I'm warmed.
Non-citizens dedicated to the death of the West aren't welcome.
What kind of society deliberately imports its saboteurs? It's madness and suicide.
What kind of society deliberately imports its saboteurs? It's madness and suicide.
It’s a lot more simple and stupid than that.
The American Left (and their normie allies in the Democrat party) hate western culture. The towelheads hate western culture as well. Thus the left supports motherfuckers like Hamas.
Their confusion has lead to some breathtakingly stupid alliances (see “Queers for Palestine”).
Just where do these goofballs think their place is in the New Caliphate?
Marxism has its origins in Western culture. It's really a case of hating classical liberalism.
Democrats persecuted the innocent J6 tourists over their beliefs and you were ok with it you leftist hypocrite. That invalidates your criticism and makes whatever Trump does ok.
You really are fucking broken. You supported 20 years for entering a government building. And now you seem outraged a member of a group supporting actual terrorism in violation of his green card is deported.
You really have become a leftist piece of shit.
This is likely the closest he gets to human interaction.
What else do the voices tell you?
The truth. You really are a scumbag.
Sullum remains his consistency with only learning what corporate media and likely reddit tell him.
Here is the group Khalil belongs to.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1899348525298729368.html
It is a violation of his authorization and green card status to belong to this group, let alone be a leader.
Even citizens in this group would be denied clearances and such for their involvement.
Fuck off sullum.
The steaming pile of TDS-addled shit Sullum is explicitly making a public ass of himself.
Fuck off and die, you pathetic ass-wipe.
Yeah, Trump should have done as the left does and just cancelled the guy -- take away his job, his reputation, his bank accounts, and whatnot. That would have been a lot fairer, right, Gollum? Er, I mean, Sullum?
do you post @midnite so it gets buried before people show up or because you are truly excited to exhibit your opinion?
The second worst thing about immigration (pre-assimilation) to the US is that migrants bring their baggage to the US and fight their Old World battles and hatreds here. Using violence would obviously be worse than speech but still it is all an attempt to degrade the US into being merely an extension of Old World shit.
The WORST thing about immigration is that they convince the US and the power of the US government to engage in those Old World battles and hatreds. Not via persuasion of Americans but via power/coercion by officialdom. That they succeed in degrading the US into becoming little more than a vassal state.
That has now happened.
The values underlying the First Amendment, and the reasons we have it, don't depend on speakers' citizenship. It's there because we need a robust marketplace of ideas, and because there's no way to let officials police "bad" ideas without suppressing good ones. These things are true regardless of who is speaking. And the First Amendment speaks of "the people". If the authors meant "citizens", why didn't they just say that?
OK so he can't be prosecuted based on words.
But he sure as heck can be deported, due to the green card rules (to which the First Amendment has no relationship).
Either way it is likely to be tested in the courts. Then Trump will have the opportunity to ignore the rulings. Although it's always difficult to tell what his intentions are, and he may not even be clear himself on a specific goal here, he seems to be gunning for a Constitutional Crisis. I hope we all survive it if it comes.
It's too bad that the First Amendment is allowed by Our Democracy [TM] to exist and be enforced in isolation of those founding principles which were encoded in the rest of the Constitution. The socialists see themselves as the good guys and that anything they do in violation of those principles must, therefore, be a good thing. Our Democracy suppressed free speech when they felt it was bad speech in opposition to draconian pandemic lockdowns and conspiracy theories about the virology lab experimental origin. When Our Democracy betrays the values underlying the First Amendment it is insincere to complain about betrayals by others subsequently.
If I came to live in your house and said I want to kill you everyday, would you let me stay?
People seem to miss that the First Amendment is the right to speak, not the right without consequences.
He isn't going to jail. He's been asked to leave because he violated his green card. He's taken over buildings and destroyed property.
If the authors meant "citizens", why didn't they just say that?
Because this is a fundamentally retarded, ass-backwards, to the point of bad faith reading of The Constitutions by people who have, apparently, been ideologically retarded morons all along.
The Constitution specifically delineates that Congress cannot pass a law preventing speech of "We The People". It further goes on to break down exactly who is and is not "The People" and how humans who aren't The People can be handled.
It even explicitly goes further on that last point to delineate that not all people are citizens and that even the strictest citizenship doesn't protect you, or your speech universally and unilaterally.
It's not a document securing your neighbor the right to protest you on your lawn and you'd have to be either brain damaged stupid, cravenly dishonest, or both to interpret it that way.
No, I don't agree with Trump's interpretation. Yes, I agree that Congress gave him the authority to pretty much do whatever he wants to do. No, I don't think Congress should have given him the broad sweeping authority he now has that the last twenty Presidents handed down to him and also abused over the decades. Yes, I agree that Hamas and terrorist supporters are horrible people. No, I don't agree that the recent war in Gaza is genocidal or that Israel prefers war to peace. Yes, I believe Israel has the right to defend itself against attacks by people who will accept nothing less than the extermination of the Jewish State of Israel. No, I don't agree that this is a First Amendment issue. All clear now?
The author mentions "abhorrent speech" from CUAD, but doesn't mention the fact that they harassed and intimidated Jewish students and professors, engaged in vandalism, takeover of buildings, disruption of campus acrivities.
Whether Khalil is responsible for all that I suppose is another legal issue that can be tested in courts. However the author is wrong in pretending the issue with the Columbia protesters is about them expressing opinions -- he is in fact hiding and covering up major aspects of this story to sanitize CUAD as merely a group involved in freedom of expression.
Just the headline - Sullum you idiot. He's being removed because he has taken over buildings, called for violence.
He's also here as a guest, which you seem to miss. While 'legal resident' makes it sound like it's an American Citizen, he's not. He has rules to follow on his green card.
Get bent you lying hack. Reason - don't ask for donations with writers like this
Yeah, there is targeting , you blind morons
Judicial Coup: Radical Leftist Judges Wage All-Out War Against President Trump and the Nation — 129 Legal Challenges Filed in Two Months, MORE THAN ALL US PRESIDENTS COMBINED!
Sullum has the mind of a child.
In general, when we let people immigrate here, we should definitely attempt to select for people who have good values and viewpoints that are favorable toward freedom.
It's about his actions, not speech.
An English teacher would wretch at that headline, it confuses and it it argues with itself
Trump Is Explicitly Targeting Legal Residents Based on the Opinions They Express
So "explicitly" targeting is better , worse, neither -- than non-explicit or just 'targeting' ???? makes me laugh
It is about his actions and you obviously know that
And then "Legal" so like it wouldn't be bad to target if they were illegal. There we go again.
And "Opinions they express" === and what is an opinion you don't express. A thought, a leaning, a thing you don't see but it exists.
Remember when the State Department banned communists from immigrating and deported immigrants who expressed support for communism? This is the same principle.
Exactly... Well Said +1000000000000.
Guests in one's house do not carry the same level as owners of said house. The fact media is trying to portray both as having the same level of justification for 'staying' says more about the guests than it does anything else.
Rights? What Rights?
Yes, SCOTUS has ruled that any foreigner who steps foot on these United States has a right to say anything that he wants against it. That opinion is based upon First Amendment drafted at the end of the 18th-century.
Should that opinion still apply in an age of widespread and instantaneous communication? A strong case can be made that it should not. If you don't like that which is going on in the USA and feel obligated to shoot off your mouth about it, maybe you shouldn't be here.