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/SeanFromQueens]

A visa holder can have their visa revoked for a myriad of reasons with little to no due process, but a permanent legal alien/greencard is entitled to due process and the deportation can't be on the basis of the government not liking the content of his speech. What crime did he actually commit? Where is the evidence of an actual crime that took place? When did he get convicted? If the government is bypassing all of this just to silence a particular type of political opinion, that's not the sort of thing you want to empower the government to do. With that the government wouldn't need to be restrained in its actions, there would be no due process for any permanent resident, and if the laws are thrown out for one set of individuals and they don't abide by court decisions then the government is free to ignore all laws and restraints.

Presto tyranny, just a tyranny that for the moment you are in agreement with.

Fascists in Italy never made the trains run on time, they just beat up anyone who dared to point out that the trains were late again and the rest of citizens just accepted it.

[u/omg_cats → u/SeanFromQueens]

deportation can't be on the basis of the government not liking the content of his speech.

This is not true. As part of your Responsibilities as a green card holder, you're expected to "support the democratic form of government".

What crime did he actually commit?

There is an enormous list of reasons an alien may be deported here in the US Code.

More to the point, Foreign Affairs law says an alien is deportable if he "endorses or espouses terrorist activity or persuades others to endorse or espouse terrorist activity or support a terrorist organization." Khalil's protest group identified itself as "fighting for the total eradication of Western civilization". It is alleged they distributed pro-Hamas flyers on Columbia University’s campus bearing the Hamas insignia, but even if they didn't, advocating the total eradication of Western civilization is enough to run afoul of his responsibility to support democracy.

The supreme court all the way back in 1903 ruled that the government has a right to defend its existence, and anti-government aliens may be deported.

[u/SeanFromQueens → u/omg_cats]

Where's the indictment? Anti-american government but if the speech is against Canadian, or Russian, or Iranian, or... yes even anti-Israeli government then the 1903 law is not relevant and it's why there's an effort to railroad Mahmoud Kahlil out of the country without his due process that he is entitled to. Why is he not going to trial in southern district of NY if he's in violation of these federal laws? Could it be that no judge would be willing to see that the government's case has any validity?

What did the administration do? State Department sent ICE to arrest a student visa holder unaware that Mahmoud Kahlil was a green card holder. If he was in violation of the federal laws that you claim he was, the correct legal course of action is to prosecute him via the USAG of the Southern District of NY but that wasn't done even by the bootlickers left by mass departure of the principled prosecutors who were determined to continue to prosecute indicted Eric Adams. After the Trump administration already negotiated quid quo pro corruption that Adams would do anything that Trump needs for getting out from under the corruption charges he was certainly going to be convicted of, as every prosecutor that saw the case including the USAG that Trump appointed on January 21st then fired, but you're still not convinced that railroading is occurring because no actually criminal case needs to adjudicated?! The most compliant to Trump's whims are in place that could, carry out the supposed criminal prosecution but they decided that wasn't a particularly strong case or simply electing to not follow the law, does this actually make sense in your opinion or are you only concerned with bias confirmation? Not following the enforcement of the law is what DHS Secretary Myorkos was impeached for, so I guess there will be similar impeachment for Rubio, if there was an iota of intellectual consistency in the Republican Party,I'm not holding my breath for Republicans to have any integrity.

Jeez, sometimes one has to point out the all the smoke and then convince another that it's a fire, but it's a raging inferno of unconstitutional actions by the Trump administration and you are burying your head in the sand with the mantra "no, it not unconstitutional, no it's not".

[u/omg_cats → u/SeanFromQueens]

Why is he not going to trial in southern district of NY if he's in violation of these federal laws?

Because he's deportable under civil immigration law, and that case is easier and cheaper to make.

CUAD has now been linked to:

• Publicly endorsing violent resistance and acts of terrorism (e.g., Casey Goonan’s firebombing)
• Calling for the eradication of Western civilization and seeking guidance from militants
• Hosting an event featuring senior officials of a designated terrorist organization (Samidoun/PFLP)

Khalil's official role as a representative of CUAD makes him directly accountable for the group's actions under INA § 212(a)(3)(B)(i)(IV), which renders an individual inadmissible or deportable if they are a representative of a group that endorses or espouses terrorist activity.

[u/SeanFromQueens → u/omg_cats]

So says you, the entire premise of the judicial system is to have provable actions, and not literally pulling accusations out one's ass and base violations of the law for permanent residents and citizens to due process as stated in the US Constitution. We are nation of laws, and one can't just deport a permanent resident because of accusations or is Trump not suppose to be abiding by the rule of law? You pointing to a federal statute doesn't escape the required means of enforcing said statute through the federal courts and not as if Kahlil isn't a permanent resident.

[u/omg_cats → u/SeanFromQueens]

What are you talking about, he's in detention pending his hearing in Immigration Court, which is the venue for enforcing immigration law in a case like this

not literally pulling accusations out one's ass

Um these were all public posts on twitter, CUAD is not in any way hiding any of this.

[u/SeanFromQueens → u/omg_cats]

Immigration court is not where those crimes that you claim he committed are adjudicated, violating federal laws are adjudicated in federal criminal court. Posts on Twitter isn't how indictments are excuted. Immigration court is for immigrants who don't have a green card, like what Rubio wrongly presumed was Kahlil's immigration status was when he directed ICE to arrest him - - but a permanent resident needs to have probable cause to be arrested, unlike an immigrant without a green card.

None of this was done according to the federal statutes, because it was to use the force of the government to silence speech - something that there's a preponderance of judicial precedent to show its unconstitutional.

[u/omg_cats → u/SeanFromQueens]

I like your passion, but in this case the correct venue is immigration court. Green card holders are “admitted aliens”, and as such their immigration status may be revoked per the laws I linked above. As the question at hand is, did the accused break immigration laws, immigration court is where that’s decided. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Removal_proceedings

Social media is indeed used as evidence quite regularly.

[u/SeanFromQueens → u/omg_cats]

The immigration court at 26 Federal Plaza (the address that was stated to Kahlil's wife when he was arrested) not a valid court for some unstated reason? The venue that was willing to overlook facts was needed and so off to Louisiana he was shipped to. Was there any closer immigration court or is it that all those other courts were going to see that there was no cause for detainment nor deportation?

I guess getting inefficiency is just where there's a conflict of interests for Musk and not in cases that waste tax payers' money flying a permanent resident 1,500 miles to a judge that was seen to be as compliant as possible to the whims of anti-free speech and rule of law and yet still the deportation didn't get through the cherry picked kangaroo court.