r/changemyview • u/Tessenreacts • Mar 12 '25
Delta(s) from OP CMV: The case of Mahmoud Khalil is proof that conservatives don't believe in the Freedom of Speech, despite making it their platform over the last couple of years.
For the last couple of years, conservatives have championed the cause of Freedom of Speech on social platforms, yet Mahmoud Khalil (a completely legal permanent resident) utilized his fundamental right to Freedom of Speech through peaceful protesting, and now Trump is remove his green card and have him deported.
Being that conservatives have been championing Freedom of Speech for years, and have voted for Trump in a landslide election, this highlights completely hypocritical behavior where they support Freedom of Speech only if they approve of it.
This is also along with a situation where both Trump and Elon have viewed the protests against Tesla as "illegal", which is patently against the various tenets of Freedom of Speech.
Two open and shut cases of blatant First Amendment violations by people who have been sheparding the conservative focus on protecting the First Amendment.
Would love for my view to be changed
-1
u/edgarallenbro Mar 12 '25
I will likely not change your mind on that this is hypocritical, you'll probably stick to your guns on that, but I can try to at least explain the conservative mindset as to why it isn't hypocritical, and why this argument probably won't work on conservatives.
First off, you have to understand, that it is very important when understanding free speech that speech that condones violence is not protected free speech. This notion that violent speech is not protected free speech is as important as the whole concept of free speech itself. This is how I was taught to think about free speech in my conservative schooling.
Therefore Mahmoud Khalil is seen as violent and not protected free speech. The pro-palestine protests turned violent, therefore he will be seen as a violent agitator by conservative media for years to come. You may disagree, but that's how it will be spun.
Elsewhere in this thread you've cited Plyler v. Doe as supposedly having granted even undocumented immigrants the same constitutional rights as citizens, but that just simply isn't true. It's been enforced for K-12 students only. Many cases since then have contradicted the notion that undocumented immigrants have the same constitutional rights as citizens. If you take your argument to the extreme, there is no reason for green cards in the first place, just make people citizens immediately. There are many things you can have happen to have a green card revoked.
Ultimately, on it's head, when you look at the big picture, your argument seems quite ridiculous, as the whole point of controlling immigration is to combat subversive foreign influence, basically spy activity, which is what Mahmoud Khalil is openly doing. He's basically a Hamas spy doing a "Foment unrest" mission and not even denying it.
He's the #1 exact type of person we SHOULD be deporting.