←back to thread

1210 points jbegley | 1 comments | | HN request time: 1.282s | 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 #
rdtsc ◴[] No.43660748[source]
> the provision allows the secretary of state alone to “personally determine” whether he should remain in the country

That's how it always worked? This idea that someone is entitled to a student visa is just odd, and I am speaking as someone who had a variety of different visas, including two student visas. You're really at the whim of the state department. It just takes getting notice, a minor infraction, not submitting a renewal on time, or lying on a form and you're done. Lawyers may helps there is some way to appeal but it's an incredible uphill battle.

replies(1): >>43675177 #
hn_throwaway_99 ◴[] No.43675177[source]
> That's how it always worked?

Not really. Yes, the state department has always been the say on who gets visas.

But the Supreme Court has also previously ruled that non-citizens enjoy the same constitutional protections as citizens, and that includes free speech. No other previous administrations have been so blatant about revoking visas simply for the "crime" of voicing one's opinion on the Israel-Palestine conflict. The case of the Turkish student who was abducted in Massachusetts is particularly egregious, because as far as anyone can tell all she did was right an op ed, and not a very controversial one at that.

We're in uncharted waters here because previous administrations have generally followed constitutional norms when it came to making visa decisions.

replies(1): >>43677210 #
1. rdtsc ◴[] No.43677210[source]
> No other previous administrations have been so blatant about revoking visas simply for the "crime" of voicing one's opinion on the Israel-Palestine conflict.

They don’t see it as a free speech issue. They are not imprisoning the person but “simply” sending them home.

> We're in uncharted waters here because previous administrations have generally followed constitutional norms when it came to making visa decisions.

Not really, they specifically ask about membership in various parties, namely the communist party. This is nothing new at all. Any student coming say in the 80s and starting to show up at pro Communist party protests would have been just as easily kicked out.

A visa like J-1 can be revoked for non-criminal reasons. They don’t see a student visa validity as a free speech issue. It has never been and won’t be until the law is changed.