How big is immigration an issue on people's minds (USA and elsewhere)?

[Cloud_Strife]

So much for freedom of speech/views

 

[Estebonrober]

US judge rules Mahmoud Khalil can be deported for his views

Mahmoud Khalil, the Columbia University graduate and Palestinian organizer, is eligible to be deported from the United States, an immigration judge ruled on Friday during a contentious hearing at a remote court in central Louisiana.

The decision sides with the Trump administration’s claim that a short memo written by secretary of state Marco Rubio, which stated Khalil’s “beliefs and associations” were counter to foreign policy interests, is sufficient evidence to remove a lawful permanent resident from the United States. The undated memo, the main piece of evidence submitted by the government, contained no allegations of criminal conduct.

During a tense hearing on Friday afternoon, Khalil’s attorneys made an array of unsuccessful arguments attempting to both delay a ruling on his eligibility for removal and to terminate proceedings entirely. They argued the broad allegations contained in Rubio’s memo gave them a right to directly cross-examine him.

Khalil held prayer beads as attorneys for three attorneys for the Department of Homeland Security presented arguments for his removal.

Judge Jamee Comans ruled that Rubio’s determination was “presumptive and sufficient evidence” and that she had no power to rule on concerns over free speech.

“There is no indication that Congress contemplated an immigration judge or even the attorney general overruling the secretary of state on matters of foreign policy,” Comans said.

A supporter was in tears on the crowded public benches as the ruling was delivered.

Following the ruling, Khalil, who had remained silent throughout proceedings, requested permission to speak before the judge.

Addressing the judge directly, he said: “I would like to quote what you said last time, that ‘there’s nothing that’s more important to this court than due process rights and fundamental fairness’.”

He continued: “Clearly what we witnessed today, neither of these principles were present today or in this whole process.

“This is exactly why the Trump administration has sent me to this court, 1,000 miles away from my family. I just hope that the urgency that you deemed fit for me is afforded to the hundreds of others who have been here without hearing for months.”

Trump administration lists thousands of immigrants as dead in new policy

The Department of Homeland Security requested the Social Security Administration to enter more than 6,000 names of immigrants into its database used to track dead people, according to a DHS official with knowledge of the decision.

The move will effectively financially starve the immigrants, cutting off their ability to legally work in the country, receive various government benefits and access financial services like credit and bank accounts. The Trump administration is hoping it will drive them to self-deport, according to the official. It’s all a part of the administration’s efforts to crack down on migrants in the country.

Well the law has been a farce here for at least the past 10 years, so I'm not sure what people expect? Its time to get very hobbsian around here in the US I'd imagine.

I have no government, no nation, no people. Who knows what will happen when the rest of America realizes the obvious reality.

 

[Lexicus]

The ruling is not the final word, Mahmoud's counsel still can present its case for why he should not be deported and apparently there is a separate challenge filed in NJ federal court.

 

[Zardnaar]

So much for freedom of speech/views

Doesn't protect you from consequences just imprisonment.

There's usually an ambiguous line on visa requirements. Makes deportation easier if you just cancel visas vs trying to deport them in other ways. Here its good character so hey can essentially cancel or decline to issue visas to whoever.

If you attend protests there's usually some numb nuts advocating violence (proud boys, anarchists, anti semitism types with Israel).

So guilt by association ergo violating good character requirements. I wouldn't attend protests in any nation I'm reliant on a visa basically.

Not sure on USA requirements on visas. They might not be able to pin anything on you but revoking visas is just easier.

Hell I would think twice on it if you're on PR as well.

 

[danjuno]

Doesn't protect you from consequences just imprisonment.

There's usually an ambiguous line on visa requirements. Makes deportation easier if you just cancel visas vs trying to deport them in other ways. Here its good character so hey can essentially cancel or decline to issue visas to whoever.

If you attend protests there's usually some numb nuts advocating violence (proud boys, anarchists, anti semitism types with Israel).

So guilt by association ergo violating good character requirements. I wouldn't attend protests in any nation I'm reliant on a visa basically.

Not sure on USA requirements on visas. They might not be able to pin anything on you but revoking visas is just easier.

Hell I would think twice on it if you're on PR as well.

So you're saying your government regularly deports Visa holders or PRs for saying something they don't like?

 

[Lexicus]

just imprisonment.

Ah, well, good thing Mahmoud isn't in prison then! Oh, wait, he is? Ah, well, nevertheless,

 

[Zardnaar]

So you're saying your government regularly deports Visa holders or PRs for saying something they don't like?

Nope but they theoretically coukd depending on the nature of the protest or whatever.

Think they revoked some right wing type before she got here. Another's not welcome back.

Better example would be lying on a visa application. Getting a conviction is harder than just revoking it for failing the good character part.

If you were here and a protest devolved into a riot or a slogan you were shouting caught on video could be construed s hate speech then yes they could revoke your visa.

Protesting against Israel probably wouldn't do it. Using the phrase sea to shining sea might. A protest where violence gets used coukd also maybe do it if you're caught inflatming it.

Often it depends on if anyone complains, anything gets destroyed or someone gets hurt or you're endangering others or yourself.

 

[Zardnaar]

Ah, well, good thing Mahmoud isn't in prison then! Oh, wait, he is? Ah, well, nevertheless,

Once again free speech isn't a universal do whatever the hell you want.

 

[Tee Kay]

Once again free speech isn't a universal do whatever the hell you want.

usually they mean stuff like "yelling fire in a crowded theatre" not "criticising American foreign policy"

 

[Zardnaar]

usually they mean stuff like "yelling fire in a crowded theatre" not "criticising American foreign policy"

What are the rules around visas though? Can they revoke them for mo reason or very little?

 

[Samson]

usually they mean stuff like "yelling fire in a crowded theatre" not "criticising American foreign policy"

You do know that these are actually exactly the same things?

That phrase was coined in Schenck v. United States when communists were not protected by free speech when they distributed flyers to draft-age men urging resistance to WW1 conscription, and could be convicted of an attempt to obstruct the draft, a criminal offense.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

US expected a big travel year, but overseas visitors — angered by Trump — are heading elsewhere

Visits to the U.S. from overseas fell 11.6% in March compared to the same month last year, according to preliminary government data released Tuesday.

apnews.com

Tourism industry is going to suffer Trump dearly. Many countries have recommended it's citizens not to travel to USA. Apart the individual boycott is going to be huge. Particularly from Canada, the main source for tourists coming to US. It is not a minor thing. Tourism is a multi trillion industry. About 3% of US GDP.

Share of GDP from tourism

An interactive visualization from Our World in Data.

ourworldindata.org

 

[Tee Kay]

You do know that these are actually exactly the same things?

That phrase was coined in Schenck v. United States when communists were not protected by free speech when they distributed flyers to draft-age men urging resistance to WW1 conscription, and could be convicted of an attempt to obstruct the draft, a criminal offense.

You do know that normal people can distinguish between speech that creates clear and present danger and speech that is more morally ambiguous, legal sophistry notwithstanding

 

[Samson]

You do know that normal people can distinguish between speech that creates clear and present danger and speech that is more morally ambiguous, legal sophistry notwithstanding

Yeah, I think "normal" people can. The point is that the judges may come with a completely different definition and that will be the one that is accepted as legal fact.

 

[Senethro]

What are the rules around visas though? Can they revoke them for mo reason or very little?

Once again you seem incapable of having an opinion on rules themselves. You treat them as inevitable and immutable.

 

[Tee Kay]

Yeah, I think "normal" people can. The point is that the judges may come with a completely different definition and that will be the one that is accepted as legal fact.

I'm not addressing a judge though, I'm addressing some guy in New Zealand.

What are the rules around visas though? Can they revoke them for mo reason or very little?

In my country it's pretty much at the discretion of the minister.

(I don't believe this to be the optimal way to do things)

 

[Zardnaar]

Once again you seem incapable of having an opinion on rules themselves. You treat them as inevitable and immutable.

They're not. You need power to change them.

Right here right now your side lacks that power. You lost the popular vote to Trump.
. Consider that moving forward. You lost to that guy.

You can be pure or you can pursue power. Make your choice.

Good news Trump will probably defeat himself.

 

[Zardnaar]

I'm not addressing a judge though, I'm addressing some guy in New Zealand.



In my country it's pretty much at the discretion of the minister.

(I don't believe this to be the optimal way to do things)

Minister has that discretion here.

Most of the time it's a bureaucrat though. No visa for you!!!

Or you get one.

 

[Senethro]

You can be pure or you can pursue power. Make your choice.

Good news Trump will probably defeat himself.

A man from a peripheral island nation without political turmoil lecturing on the virtues of compliance and inaction.

 

[Arwon]

Evil system, evil people

https://bsky.app/profile/nkalamb.bsky.social%2Fpost%2F3lngydjon2c2d