re: Mahmoud KHalil- He gone

quote:

---

Being in America while not a citizen is a privilege, not a right.

---

Even naturalized citizens are on a short leash for 10 yrs.

This is all that needs to be said. People like pandy tripping over themselves to defend this guy is embarrassing. If the previous admin did this they wouldn’t say a peep

quote:

---

agree he's deportable because the Secretary of State determined him to be. I still haven't seen him do anything that's not simple free speech-protected activity.

---

I know that you know that you can be deported for speech while holding a green car it can be revoked simply based on speech

Without the Constitution, we are just another country. I agreed with Texas when Ken Paxton sued over the theft of the 2020 election: if we don't follow the compact of the Constitution, we cease to function as America.

You can keep saying that resident aliens don't have first amendment protections all you want, but that doesn't make it true. Once situated lawfully in the United States (like Khalil was), aliens enjoy First Amendment rights.

Here's standard language on the topic First Amendment article/Middle Tennessee State

"As Justice Francis W. Murphy described the law in his concurrence in Bridges v. Wixon (1945), “the Bill of Rights is a futile authority for the alien seeking admission for the first time to these shores. But once an alien lawfully enters and resides in this country he becomes invested with the rights guaranteed by the Constitution to all people within our borders.”

In that case, the Court reversed the deportation of labor activist Harry Bridges, an Australian, because of statements he had made that prosecutors charged indicated “affiliation” with the Communist Party. Writing for the Court, Justice William O. Douglas concluded that “freedom of speech and of the press is accorded aliens residing in this country. . . . [T]he literature published by Harry Bridges, the utterances made by him were entitled to that protection.”

Now, this probably doesn't matter in Khalil's case. Using the 1952 statute to argue that the Secretary of State made the determination that Khalil's speech is antisemitic, and, therefore a hindrance to US foreign policy, will probably be enough to defeat any 1st Amendment objections. Whether or not Khalil's speech WAS antisemitic in fact won't matter. Brilliant legal maneuvering by the Trump Administration.

quote:

---

quote:
Comparing people who are citizens with a right to be here to people who are here solely because we allow it is not an apples to apples comparison.


To not understand this people are either being willfully ignorant, or are too stupid to have a discussion with anyway.

---

People often want to start the argument at point B rather than deal with point A.

He is not a US citizen, he is a guest. He is supporting a terrorist organization. His rights end when they infringe upon mine, and overtaking buildings and obstructing the flow of other students, intimidation, and other nonsense is not free speech.

When your guest is an obnoxious arse, you kick them out....and he has been kicked out. Now watch how quickly all this goes away and ask yourself.....what or who instigated this????

Thank the Lord. I can now sleep soundly …

I couldn't find reference to Columbia suspending Khalil. I found his long opinion piece to the Columbia student newspaper where he lays out his grievances against Columbia. He doesn't mention suspension.

Khalil Letter to Columbia Student Newspaper

quote:

---

Imagine President AOC throwing out an Israeli student for “supporting genocide” or Blinken or Hilldawg deporting a foreign student for criticizing Zelensky. You guys are bloodthirsty and just want wins, but never stop to think what may happen when the other side wields that power the same way.

---

You are such a pussy and come up with some shite that will never happen to justify how big of a pussy you are!

Wow. Thanks Roger.

I have spent WAY too much time on this Board, but it's been very educational.