Free Speech-Who’s Got It?

Thee? Me? We?

The question of constitutional legality has come up often. The very same people who, only a few years ago, were trying to silence any and all dissent on the Covid mandates and vaccines are suddenly concerned with the free speech rights of people who are not American citizens or those that obtained green card status through convenient circumstances (marriage as a fast track for citizenship).

Technically, green card holders and migrants, in general, have the same free speech rights as native-born Americans. This is why Khalil's deportation is subject to due process. However, just because an immigrant has free speech rights, it doesn't mean they can't be deported anyway.

According to the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, the US government has the right to “preserve the sociological and cultural balance of the United States” and deny foreign entry to the US based on a migrant's political ideology. This means that the Trump Administration does have the power to remove foreigners, even those with green cards, if they are seen as an ideological threat to the West.

That is to say, migrants have free speech rights, but the federal government also has the right to kick them out. Is this contradictory? Maybe, but it's also a fact of life for anyone wanting access to US soil.

Democrats claim the law no longer has standing because it is "73 years old" (the Bill of Rights is hundreds of years old, and the age of a law is irrelevant). They also say that later civil rights policies make the law obsolete. But is this really true? Maybe strict immigration laws are more important than ever in light of efforts by leftist politicians and NGOs working hand in hand to flood the US with disruptive foreign elements…

The political left has been engaged in a guerrilla war in which civil liberties are used as a shield to protect astroturf activism paid for by NGOs, along with deliberately destructive third-world immigration. The strategy is classically Marxist: use the opponent's rules against him, while you have no rules of your own….

There is certainly the ongoing risk of a slippery slope of governmental overreach. Do the deportations stop with people like Mahmoud Khalil, reportedly participating in high profile civil disturbances? Or, will this power be used against people who merely engage in peaceful criticism? The idea that constitutional rights don't necessarily apply to everyone equally doesn't sit well with many Americans, but at this time in US history, a line in the sand when it comes to migrants is necessary.

The bottom line is, not every foreigner is entitled to US access. Not every foreigner is entitled to the same rights as native born American citizens. American society is not a lump of clay to be molded by all foreign activists who happen to come along. There are civilizational boundaries and rules of decorum. Immigrants should probably keep their heads down and remain thankful that they were allowed into the country at all.

h/t Tyler Durden, Zero Hedge

BW