←back to thread

1210 points jbegley | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
spencerflem ◴[] No.43658559[source]
Judges have now ruled that suspected "expected beliefs" that are "otherwise lawful" is grounds for deportation, if those suspected thoughts are "antisemitic" (read- supportive of peace in Palestine).

They are literally arresting and deporting people for suspected thoughts.

Student visas are being denied based on social media posts.

This is fascism.

replies(4): >>43658601 #>>43660341 #>>43660731 #>>43661716 #
hn_throwaway_99 ◴[] No.43658601[source]
> Judges have now ruled that suspected "expected beliefs" that are "otherwise lawful" is grounds for deportation, if those suspected thoughts are "antisemitic"

Do you have a link to what you are referring to?

replies(2): >>43658630 #>>43658658 #
spencerflem ◴[] No.43658630[source]
Quote from Marco Rubio (confirmed 99-0 in the Senate)

"Rubio said that while Khalil's “past, current or expected beliefs, statements, or associations that are otherwise lawful," the provision allows the secretary of state alone to “personally determine” whether he should remain in the country." https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/mahmoud-khalil-deported...

The article is a day old, the judges just affirmed that Rubio is allowed to do this today

replies(2): >>43659135 #>>43660748 #
hn_throwaway_99 ◴[] No.43659135[source]
Thanks for the information. FWIW, I think this is total bullshit and fascism, but your comments aren't telling the whole story.

The most important thing to point out is that "the judges" in this case was actually a single immigration judge. Immigration judges belong to the executive branch, not the judiciary. I agree this law that says that the Secretary of State can essentially just deport anyone they want can't be squared with the constitutional rights of freedom of speech and due process. But that wasn't really this immigration judge's determination to make, i.e. questioning the constitutionality of the law that Rubio is using to deport Khalil. There is a separate case going on in federal court that should address that topic.

This article has more info: https://archive.vn/D890d

replies(1): >>43659172 #
1. spencerflem ◴[] No.43659172[source]
In a different deportation case they just defied a supreme court ruling - https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/11/trump-deport...

Didn't realize that the judge in the linked one was an immigration judge and not a judiciary judge thanks for the clarification

replies(1): >>43659975 #
2. hn_throwaway_99 ◴[] No.43659975[source]
That other deportation case you link to here is even more bizarrely evil to me. At least in the other examples the administration is making the case that they should have the power to deport these people under law (not like I agree with that interpretation, but they are at least trying to make an argument).

In this other case, the administration flat out admitted they made a mistake and that he shouldn't have been deported. So they ship him to this notorious prison and then just do an "oopsies, our bad, he's gone now." Not only do I not see how the administration's stance is defensible, why would you even want to defend it, especially if you actually agreed with their overall stance of wanting to increase deportations of "bad guys". The administration said outright he is not a bad guy!

I simply can't understand it outside of a "the cruelty is the point" framework, but even in that framework the cruelty is normally directed at "bad guys". Now folks are OK with cruelty to random people that was the result of an admitted error. WTF happened to our country?

replies(1): >>43660029 #
3. spencerflem ◴[] No.43660029[source]
completely agreed. its nice to find someone else worried about this on hacker news