New US visa rules will force foreign students to unlock social media profiles

Nonetheless one can be dismayed at seeing what those we've placed in power decide to do with that privilege.

How would you like to be probed by your host country today?

The issue is that the US claims to be a free speech absolutist and even tries to apply this morality outside its borders using criticism and sometimes force.

Next up is "you don't have a right to go to college" right?

Trump administration has already made demands to monitor US students for "viewpoint diversity" and adjust admissions accordingly ...

"You dont have the right to enter another country" How do you know.

"Therefore any country is allowed to investigate you" What for thought crimes?

Bootlicking levels are off the charts here. Theres nothing reasonable about investigating someones social media history, especially because opinions change over time. I dont want to see people in immigration detention because of a decade old social media post. This is the kind of behaviour that we used to criticise failed states for. "Its not safe for you to travel to syria because you gave a talk about human rights abuses of the assad regime" etc.

Americans rightly criticised Australia for preventing americans with wonky ideas from traveling to Australia.

Why is this view suddenly being normalised now that America wants to implement it?

The executive can only enforce laws passed by the legislature. The first amendment says that "Congress shall make no law". So how the hell can the executive make decisions about anything based on a person's speech? If Congress approved this, it's unconstitutional. If they haven't, the executive is going beyond their purview, which is also unconstitutional.

> "You dont have the right to enter another country" How do you know.

If you're applying for a visa it's because you don't have the right to enter. Not only is there no reason to apply for a visa if you already have the right to enter, it's usually illegal to do so.

> Theres nothing reasonable about investigating someones social media history, especially because opinions change over time. I dont want to see people in immigration detention because of a decade old social media post. This is the kind of behaviour that we used to criticise failed states for. "Its not safe for you to travel to syria because you gave a talk about human rights abuses of the assad regime" etc.

The US has always been unreasonable at the border. Nothing is changing there sadly.

That's correct, you don't. Colleges can and will deny you admissions if you express certain unpopular opinions.

In this case the government wishes to do so.

>If you're applying for a visa it's because you don't have the right to enter. Not only is there no reason to apply for a visa if you already have the right to enter, it's usually illegal to do so.

Really hinges on how you use the word "right". There's plenty of people in Gaza that have a right to return to their homes, but are unable to thanks to some dicks with tanks and a big wall.

There are plenty of people worldwide who are unable to enter countries when they have an established right to. Like I said. "How do you know"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_return

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement

>The US has always been unreasonable

True.

If a country is occupying or blockading land that doesn't belong to them, the problem isn't their visa procedures. It's not that you have a right to enter that country - you have a right to go to that land.

Distinction without a difference. A country is a theoretical concept that is associated with a piece of land.

If a country thinks a place that you have a right to be, is that country, it doesn't diminish your right to be there.

Like for the right of return, it doesn't matter what flag is flapping in the wind, the refugees have an equal right to return to their homes. Its actually the missing link in most discussions about Israel. They could have their single state solution with literally zero fanfare if they just let everyone return to their land. The issue is that they have settled other people on that land in the mean time, and ultimately their goal has always been settlement. So they have to resist the return of those refugees.