US Revokes 300 Student Visas in Crackdown on Campus Protests

[Etaoin Shrdlu]

2 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   Nope, encouraging violence isn't allowed under freedom of speech 

 

Look up the Brandenburg Test.

[Nick Carter icp]

4 minutes ago, Etaoin Shrdlu said:

 

Student visas don't contain conditions that prohibit engaging in speech protected under the US Constitution.

 

    This isn't about freedom of speech .

[Nick Carter icp]

2 minutes ago, Etaoin Shrdlu said:

 

Look up the Brandenburg Test.

 

"A state may not forbid speech advocating the use of force or unlawful conduct unless this advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action."

 

   They did participate in lawless action , so, bang to rights 

[Etaoin Shrdlu]

Just now, Nick Carter icp said:

 

"A state may not forbid speech advocating the use of force or unlawful conduct unless this advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action."

 

   They did participate in lawless action , so, bang to rights 

 

If they broke the law, then charge them, and if convicted, deport them. 

 

They are still entitled to due process.

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, Etaoin Shrdlu said:

 

If they broke the law, then charge them, and if convicted, deport them. 

 

They are still entitled to due process.

They had due process under immigration law. Which is the condition they were allowed into the US

[Etaoin Shrdlu]

2 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

They had due process under immigration law. Which is the condition they were allowed into the US

 

They still have the right to go before an immigration judge before deportation.

[Patong2021]

17 minutes ago, Etaoin Shrdlu said:

 

Student visas don't contain conditions that prohibit engaging in speech protected under the US Constitution.

The student visas  in some cases would not have been granted had the applicants  declared their intent to engage in political activities. First the DS 160 form must be completed truthfully. There are country specific questions. There are questions asked about whether or not you have a social media presence, membership in certain political groups. For example, the Afghanistan DS 160 will ask about clan or tribe  membership, Taliban affiliation, military or militia service. Then in the interview, there are direct questions asked. One of them is whether or not there is support or sympathy for groups deemed to be terrorist or against national interest. 

 

Alhough green card holders can engage in lawful peaceful protest, some of the students have been identifed because of their participation in unlawful, non peaceful protests. Others have been implicated in the support of  groups classified as terrorist.

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, Etaoin Shrdlu said:

 

They still have the right to go before an immigration judge before deportation.

Get back to me when you have checked the law. You have not. That is obvious or you would not be so ignorant as to why their visas were legally revoked

[Patong2021]

7 minutes ago, Etaoin Shrdlu said:

 

If they broke the law, then charge them, and if convicted, deport them. 

 

They are still entitled to due process.

Perhaps in some cases where there are criminal charges.. In other cases,  if the visa is revoked, then there is no  right to due process. Remember that  immigration is a civil procedure. There is no criminal due process under a civil procedure. Due process is only involved if the person has been charged with a criminal act such as  fraud.  The visa  can still be revoked  for fraud, but as a civil law prrocedure.  The INS/Homeland Security  has been doing this  for decades. 

[Etaoin Shrdlu]

Just now, Bkk Brian said:

Get back to me when you have checked the law. You have not. That is obvious or you would not be so ignorant as to why their visas were legally revoked

 

I suggest you check.

 

All persons in the US, regardless of their immigration status, have the right to due process. Foreigners in the US on student visas are entitled to appear before an immigration judge prior to deportation.

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, Etaoin Shrdlu said:

 

I suggest you check.

 

All persons in the US, regardless of their immigration status, have the right to due process. Foreigners in the US on student visas are entitled to appear before an immigration judge prior to deportation.

Who told you they have not had the necessary due process after having their visas legally revoked under bas8c immigration law? Ie the offer to consult a lawyer with view to appeal?

[mogandave]

1 hour ago, Etaoin Shrdlu said:

 

We don't need violent MAGAs storming the capitol and threatening to hang Mike Pence, either. Yet not only has Trump pardoned most of them, but now wants to compensate them for their time in prison.

Hang Mike Pense, that’s hilarious. 

 

[mogandave]

45 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Check immigration law as to why they are being deported. Nothing to do with freedom of speech. This has been gone through many times already

All they can do is just keep regurgitating the same idiotic lie over and over. 

 

 

[mogandave]

19 minutes ago, Etaoin Shrdlu said:

 

I suggest you check.

 

All persons in the US, regardless of their immigration status, have the right to due process.

Indeed

19 minutes ago, Etaoin Shrdlu said:

 

Foreigners in the US on student visas are entitled to appear before an immigration judge prior to deportation.

No they do not.

[Evil Penevil]

The removal of pro-Hamas students is NOT a free speech issue.  Can any pro-Palestinian BM claim blocking students from attending class is protected by the First Amendment?

 

An update in this video:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/jewish-ucla-student-only-way-to-stop-antisemitic-protests-is-to-make-arrests-deport-students-with-visas/vi-AA1BLEiU?ocid=socialshare

[Luuk Chaai]

17 hours ago, connda said:

I don't agree with this at all.  For anyone who thought I'm a MAGA man - I'm not.  There are plenty of Trump policies that I don't agree with.  This is one of them.  It is meant to "chill freedom of speech" and goes 180 degree counter to the US Constitution's First Amendment protections.  It is a really dangerous precedent.  Those protections don't apply to just US citizens, they apply to everyone legally residing in the US.  I expect these case to be taken up by the SCOTUS as they should.

I, ______________________, understand that if I am issued a visa, I am required to display and surrender my visa to the United States Immigration Officer at the port of entry where I apply to enter the United States and that possession of a visa does not entitled me to enter the United States if, at the time, I am found ineligible under the immigration law.

 

bla bla bla .....

 

I do affirm, that if admitted to the United States, I will not engage in activities which would be prejudicial to the public interest, or endanger the welfare, safety, or security of the United States; in activities which would be prohibited by the laws of the United States relating to espionage, sabotage, public disorder, or in other activities subversive to the national security; in any activity the purpose of which is the opposition or the control or overthrow of, the Government of the United States, by force, violence, or other unconstitutional means. 

 

or I get the boot and sent packing ...   

 

[Evil Penevil]

1 hour ago, Luuk Chaai said:

I, ______________________, understand that if I am issued a visa, I am required to display and surrender my visa to the United States Immigration Officer at the port of entry where I apply to enter the United States and that possession of a visa does not entitled me to enter the United States if, at the time, I am found ineligible under the immigration law.

 

bla bla bla .....

 

I do affirm, that if admitted to the United States, I will not engage in activities which would be prejudicial to the public interest, or endanger the welfare, safety, or security of the United States; in activities which would be prohibited by the laws of the United States relating to espionage, sabotage, public disorder, or in other activities subversive to the national security; in any activity the purpose of which is the opposition or the control or overthrow of, the Government of the United States, by force, violence, or other unconstitutional means. 

 

 

This is part of the oath every foreign student who applies for an F-1 visa is required to affirm to a consular officer before the visa is granted.  It specifies the terms under which a student is admitted to the U.S.   Violation of those terms is grounds for revocation of the visa and removal from the U.S.

 

You can read the full oath in the Foreign Affairs Manual of the U.S. Department of State.  Follow this link: 

 https://fam.state.gov/fam/09FAM/09FAM050407.html

 

Does everyone now understand why chants of "Death to America" during a violent protest and disruption of campus classes or other normal activities are violations of the oath the student took?

 

It seems a very easy solution would be to ask all student visa applicants during the interview if they will take part in any pro-Hamas demonstrations while a student in the U.S.  If they say "yes," well, they don't get a visa.  If they say "no" but lie about it and do demonstrate illegally, they have violated the terms of the visa and can be removed from the U.S.

[stevenl]

2 hours ago, Luuk Chaai said:

I, ______________________, understand that if I am issued a visa, I am required to display and surrender my visa to the United States Immigration Officer at the port of entry where I apply to enter the United States and that possession of a visa does not entitled me to enter the United States if, at the time, I am found ineligible under the immigration law.

 

bla bla bla .....

 

I do affirm, that if admitted to the United States, I will not engage in activities which would be prejudicial to the public interest, or endanger the welfare, safety, or security of the United States; in activities which would be prohibited by the laws of the United States relating to espionage, sabotage, public disorder, or in other activities subversive to the national security; in any activity the purpose of which is the opposition or the control or overthrow of, the Government of the United States, by force, violence, or other unconstitutional means. 

 

or I get the boot and sent packing ...   

 

And none of that is applicable. If it were, there should be charges before an immigration judge.

[WDSmart]

11 hours ago, proton said:

 

Spreading hate, antisemitism, supporting Hamas and occupying Universities is not what a visa is given for, they all need to be kicked out.

"Spreading hate, antisemitism, supporting Hamas..." are all examples of free speech and are (should be) protected by our 1st Amendment, which, I understand, applies to everyone legally in the USA. "Occupying Universities" is not "free speech" and should be handled by the university itself or, at worst, public law enforcement as trespassing or some misdemeanor like that. Unless repeated, I do not think it should result in anyone on a visa being "kicked out" (visa canceled and deported).

[stevenl]

3 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

"Spreading hate, antisemitism, supporting Hamas..." are all examples of free speech and are (should be) protected by our 1st Amendment, which, I understand, applies to everyone legally in the USA. "Occupying Universities" is not "free speech" and should be handled by the university itself or, at worst, public law enforcement as trespassing or some misdemeanor like that. Unless repeated, I do not think it should result in anyone on a visa being "kicked out" (visa canceled and deported).

None of the higher profile cases has been proven to be involved in 'occupying universities ' anyway.

[hotsun]

18 hours ago, WDSmart said:

 This is a violation of their First Amendment right to free speech. I understand that this part of the Constitution applies to everyone who is legally in the USA. I'm sure this will be challenged in court, and we'll see what happens then. 

Given some of your other beliefs, i believe any sensible leftists would be distancing themselves from your posts

[radiochaser]

If you apply for a visa to the U.S. and have been found to support terrorist organizations, you can be denied a visa. 

If you are in the U.S. and have been found to support terrorist organizations, you can lose your visa and be deported. 

 

Terrorism-Related Inadmissibility Grounds (TRIG)

Generally, any individual who is a member of a “terrorist organization” or who has engaged or engages in terrorism-related activity as defined by the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) is “inadmissible” (not allowed to enter) the United States and is ineligible for most immigration benefits.

 

The definition of terrorism-related activity is relatively broad and may apply to individuals and activities not commonly thought to be associated with terrorism. As a result, Congress created a statutory exemption provision through which the Secretaries of Homeland Security and State may exempt individuals from the grounds of inadmissibility.

 

Inadmissibility

Congress has determined that some individuals should not be allowed entry into the United States. The reasons individuals are denied admission vary and can be found in INA section 212, codified as Title 8 of the U.S. Code, section 1182.

Terrorism-related inadmissibility grounds (TRIG), exclude persons who have participated in various kinds of activity, including activity that is generally illegal and/or violent. The grounds for inadmissibility include, but are not limited to, individuals who:

 

• Engaged in ‘terrorist activity;’”
• Are engaged or are likely to engage in terrorist activity after entry;
• Incited terrorist activity with intent to cause serious bodily harm or death;
• Are representatives or current members of a terrorist organization;
• Endorsed or espoused terrorist activity;  <---<<
• Received military-type training from or on behalf of a terrorist organization; or
• Are spouses or children of anyone who has engaged in terrorist activity within the last five years (with certain exceptions).

 

 

 

en·dorse

/inˈdôrs,enˈdôrs/

https://ssl.gstatic.com/dictionary/static/promos/20181204/pronunciation.svg

verb

past tense: endorsed; past participle: endorsed

1. 1.  declare one's public approval or support of.

    
   • recommend (a product) in an advertisement.  (Hamas literature)

      

      

 

[Bkk Brian]

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

And none of that is applicable. If it were, there should be charges before an immigration judge.

Yes it is, stop lying and defending the scum.

 

Read: Immigration Laws: 8 USC 1182 and 8 USC 1227 

 

Plenty of links to this already provided in previous related topics

 

 

[Bkk Brian]

22 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

"Spreading hate, antisemitism, supporting Hamas..." are all examples of free speech and are (should be) protected by our 1st Amendment, which, I understand, applies to everyone legally in the USA. "Occupying Universities" is not "free speech" and should be handled by the university itself or, at worst, public law enforcement as trespassing or some misdemeanor like that. Unless repeated, I do not think it should result in anyone on a visa being "kicked out" (visa canceled and deported).

"Spreading hate, antisemitism, supporting Hamas..." are all examples of free speech and are (should be) protected by our 1st Amendment,

 

Wrong. Another blatantly spreading misinformation

[Social Media]

@WDSmart enough of the deliberate dissemination of false claims and dangerous opinions. There are rules against it and any further posts of this nature on the topics you are posting on will be removed.

 

The Topic:

 

US Revokes 300 Student Visas in Crackdown on Campus Protests

[Evil Penevil]

2 hours ago, stevenl said:

And none of that is applicable. If it were, there should be charges before an immigration judge.

 Secretary of State Marco Rubio would appear to differ with you and he's the man who decides.  

 

Further indication of how protesters at Columbia supported Hamas.

 

 

[stevenl]

46 minutes ago, Evil Penevil said:

 Secretary of State Marco Rubio would appear to differ with you and he's the man who decides.  

 

Further indication of how protesters at Columbia supported Hamas.

 

 

Judge decides. At least it should be, hope the administration adheres to the law.

[Nick Carter icp]

2 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Judge decides. At least it should be, hope the administration adheres to the law.

 

  Do you know what the rules are ?

[Bkk Brian]

4 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Judge decides. At least it should be, hope the administration adheres to the law.

If the scum had adhered to the applicable laws they would not have had their visas revoked. Hope they learn from this. Can you reference the laws? 

[Nick Carter icp]

9 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Judge decides. At least it should be, hope the administration adheres to the law.

 

   Why would a Judge need to decide ?

The University expels them , they are no longer students , so revoke their students visas