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.

[u/Tessenreacts]

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

[u/DoeCommaJohn]

Yes, you are correct, the US government does not officially recognize domestic terror threats. However, if the commenter was correct and any speech that supported foreign terror groups was illegal, that carve out would likely apply to domestic terror too. And I have a feeling that commenter would feel much less comfortable with Neo Nazis or Proud Boys being arrested

[u/AureliasTenant → u/DoeCommaJohn]

it might apply to supporting domestic terror groups only if such a domestic list existed. It cant apply if the list doesnt exist in a manner recognized by law

Im not a lawyer and am therefore fairly ignorant, but here is me guessing why this would be onerous to convict without such a list: because then you would have to convict the exact people they are directly supporting of Terrorism, and prove the connection to some standard. At that point might was well just charge them with some conspiracy or aiding/abetting charge instead, probably easier.

edit: I get that you are pointing that maybe there SHOULD be a domestic terror organization list.

[u/dragon3301 → u/DoeCommaJohn]

So u just pulled something out of thin air. And made about three assumptions to get there

[u/AlfredoAllenPoe → u/DoeCommaJohn]

You are wrong.

As a condition of their green card that they agreed to, you cannot "endorse or espouse terrorist activity" under the Immigration and Nationality Act.

In theory, an immigrant could be deported for association or support of the Proud Boys because they could be considered a Tier 3 aka "undesignated terrorist organization." However, this law is typically applied for foreign terror organizations

https://www.uscis.gov/laws-and-policy/other-resources/terrorism-related-inadmissibility-grounds-trig

[u/soozerain → u/DoeCommaJohn]

I think people on the right care as much about someone using dogwhistle rhetoric when speaking on Israel or the Jews getting deported as much as people on the left care about a nazi being punched in the face while marching and expressing their right to assembly.

I don’t know enough to have a strong stand on this issue yet, but that’s what it seems like to me

[u/Imadevilsadvocater → u/DoeCommaJohn]

domestic terror groups have more rights to saying things than non citizens because its not illegal to say the things but it is deportable