Mahmoud Khalil’s detention is a flagrant attack on freedom of expression
Sometimes things are clear: Mahmoud Khalil, a Colombia graduate who participated in the pro -Palestine protests on the school campus, is an insult to freedom of expression. Regardless of what you think in Israel, Palestine, or protests in Colombia, if you are considered the first amendment to the United States constitution worth protection, you must oppose the Trump administration’s attempt to silence the speech by taking repressive governmental measures. This is clear enough that observers Galaxies separate They wondered from each other how Khalil’s arrest could be in line with the first amendment. Khalil was not in the United States with a student visa, but rather a green card, married to an American citizen and a legal resident. The Supreme Court ruled that the law of rights It extends to all the legal population From the United States.
At the expense of Foreign Minister Marco Rubio Personal X, he wrote: “We will cancel visas and/or green cards for Hamas supporters in America so that they can be deported.” (Publishing Contains link To the Associated Press article on the arrest of Khalil.) Until this lines are written, Khalil has not been accused of committing a crime. Rubio did not specify what “Moayad Hamas” required. Does this simply mean help in organizing a group of students who support Palestine in Colombia, as it is known that Khalil has done it? Or does it require the so -called material support – INE, send money or provide services to Hamas itself – which has not yet been accused of Khalil? Meanwhile, the White House’s account is indulged in some glossy clinic, and the publication of words.Shalom, Mahmoud“Besides a picture of Khalil above a comment he claimed was leading” activities aligned to Hamas “. This was, if anything, even mysterious from Rubio’s confirmation. What does” activities align to Hamas “mean in reality?
Trump loves to push lip service to freedom of expression, but Mahmoud Khalil’s case is another example of his repressive administration position and rejection of freedom of expression. During only fifty -two days in his position, the president has already threatened the demonstrators, and the news outlets of covering the events of the White House, and went after the law firms. He believes he attacked him unfairly in the past. In a post on social truth, books“If you support terrorism, including the slaughter of innocent men, women and children, your presence contradicts our national and external interests, and you are not welcome here.” On Tuesday, Trump stands in front of the Internet online with Elon Musk, He said From Khalil and other demonstrators who may be deported in the future, “I think we should all take them out of the country. They are rioters, they are incitement, and do not like our country.” Then he said, “I also heard his statements – it was very bad.” Trump, like Rubio, did not explain in detail any crime committed however, instead, focused on “data”. For decades, the basic basis for the first amendment speech in this country was the belief that we must protect the discourse that we do not like in particular. Civil childbirth organizations have defended the new Nazis and Ku Klux Klan on the basis that unless there is freedom of expression for the most contemptible members, there can be no freedom to express to all. In fact, a lot of the reputation of organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union depends on its willingness to defend offensive speech for the reasons for the first amendment. Even the alleged speech that supports terrorism should not be allowed not only under the first amendment, but as part of the most important – and more important – that this is a free country, where you can say what you want.
In the past decade, some liberals and progressive, or even worked to sabotage the free speech standards, a widespread issue in the press. ACLU has a painful period of internal discussions well -equipped about whether the organization will continue to defend the people who participated in the hate speech. I was very critical of the censorship sin that sometimes appear between the left, especially inside the pituitary spaces, such as IVY Legue colleges. The suppression of opposition information and opinions during the epidemic, and the alleged collusion of the Biden administration with social media companies to download “wrong information”, was a dark moment in this country, which calmly fueled the anti -Foundation’s reaction that helped return Trump to the White House. I am a fan of free speech, and I presented these criticisms in principle, not because, below the line, the logic of the logic of the left. But we clearly slipped the past, which imagined a violent reaction to a more dangerous place to civil freedoms. Anyone who hoped that the Trump administration will dismantle the restrictions of “sadness” and bring us to the era of a relatively more free discourse, which could officially escalate themselves.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Equipped with artificial intelligence tools This survey began in the social media publications for foreign students, a program of deportation for anyone who has been marked through these tools for publications that are equal, from the administration’s point of view, with the support of Hamas. The monitoring state that all helped us build with thousands of social media posts during the past fifteen years has now become an apparently effective but unprecedented machine, which seems unlikely to be responsible for its mistakes. On Monday, “Free Press” quoted a White House official saying that the Khalil case will be used as a “scheme” to investigate other students. The same official said that the prosecution against Khalil did not involve the breaking of any laws; Instead, the threat he put forward was “the foreign political interests and the national security of the United States.” Under a ruling rarely used in the Immigration and Nationality Law, “a foreign foreign or its activities in the United States, the Foreign Minister has reasonable reasons for the belief that she is likely to have serious severe consequences for foreign policy on the United States.”
This item, which dates back to 1952, was originally Targeted Jewish immigrants are suspected of being Soviet spies. This week, Rubio explained that green card holders such as Khalil should be deported because they were one day from the Vica student, and if they are now expressing opinions that would pay the abolition of these visas, their green cards must be canceled. This puzzling rationalization ignores the complete goal of the process in which visa holders become permanent residents, and citizens are often (not to mention the existence of time). Using Rubio’s logic, if a woman came to the United States in 1955 a student visa, then she had a child on the American soil that she raised to the veneer, for example, the analogous Liberation Army, will the child be deported after that, because the original crime of thought happened when his mother was in a student visa?
As a rule, I am skeptical of allegations that the Trump administration plays a 4-D chess, but the use of this ruling to name the students to threaten “external interests and national security” is a terrible insult to the first amendment that it does not feel almost unconstitutional. It should be noted that Trump’s record when it comes to flagrant constitutional violations is hardly excellent. The Islamic ban on his eighth day was in his position in 2021 Filter immediately He destroyed the legal resistance of his administration, while at a time he stimulated millions of dollars from donations to the American Civil Liberties Union, his last executive that prohibits citizenship consumed in the courts was challenged, as it is expected to die.
The good news, among all this bad, is that many Americans, when they are asked to determine the values of the country, will start with the first amendment. The right to say what you want, regardless of the popularity or lack of popularity, has been deeply excavated in the country’s political awareness so that even the two -way traders can even the supporters of the Palestinians at the Ivy League school in New York City to obtain sympathy with people who may not agree to anything he says and may prefer to leave the country, albeit, for example. On Tuesday, Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer published a statement on the Khalil case, which started reprimanding: “I disturbed and supported by Mahmoud Khalil, and I have made criticism of anti -Semitic actions in Colombia loudly.” However, although this impressionist is almost amazing, if Shomer concludes that if the Trump administration “it cannot prove that he has violated any criminal law to justify the taking of this severe action and does this for the opinions he expressed, then this is a mistake, they violate the protection of the first amendment that we all enjoy and should give up their work.”