←back to thread

I'm Peter Roberts, immigration attorney who does work for YC and startups. AMA

300 points proberts | 1 comments | 14 Mar 25 14:39 UTC | HN request time: 0.236s | source

I'll be here for the next 6 hours. As usual, there are countless possible topics and I'll be guided by whatever you're concerned with but as much as possible I'd like to focus on the recent changes and potential changes in U.S. immigration law, policy, and practice. Please remember that I am limited in providing legal advice on specific cases for obvious liability reasons because I won't have access to all the facts. Please stick to a factual discussion in your questions and comments and I'll try to do the same in my responses. Thank you!
Show context
fuzztail ◴[14 Mar 25 14:56 UTC] No.43363226[source]▶
I've seen recent examples of the government targeting green card holders for their speech. As a naturalized citizen who wants to exercise my free speech rights, how concerned should I be about potentially having my citizenship challenged on technical grounds? Are there realistic scenarios where this could happen despite First Amendment protections?
replies(7): >>43363243 #>>43363333 #>>43363705 #>>43363935 #>>43365810 #>>43368434 #>>43369456 #
proberts ◴[14 Mar 25 16:01 UTC] No.43363935[source]▶
Until recently, I would have said that the only way a citizen could have his or her citizenship taken away was by committing treason but there has been talk by the current administration about expanding the grounds as well as increasing denaturalization efforts. The first Trump administration tried this but it was largely unsuccessful but it's a different administration and a different Supreme Court so I don't think concerns now are unjustified.
replies(2): >>43364665 #>>43365142 #
ggernov[dead post] ◴[14 Mar 25 17:50 UTC] No.43365142[source]▶
[flagged]
dttze ◴[14 Mar 25 17:58 UTC] No.43365273[source]▶
Advocating for Palestinians isn’t advocating for a “terror group”. Which is itself a nebulous term that is used for political reasons.

Now, working to carry out a foreign governments interests against the best interests of the American public IS treason, but that’s okay when you’re the president I guess.

replies(3): >>43365779 #>>43366135 #>>43367766 #
1. tshaddox ◴[14 Mar 25 22:05 UTC] No.43367766[source]▶
> working to carry out a foreign governments interests against the best interests of the American public IS treason

That sounds even more vague and broad than the definition given in the Constitution. But I'm pretty sure the one in the Constitution is talking about a clear and deliberate shift in allegiance from the United States to another group that is actively engaged in hostilities with the United States.