In this week's lesson in "Constitutional Rights: Just Kidding Edition," Columbia grad Mahmoud Khalil found out the hard way that his fancy "permanent" resident card should have come with an asterisk the size of Texas when ICE agents showed up at his apartment to inform him that — SURPRISE! — his green card had been magically revoked.
Never mind that his wife is a U.S. citizen who's eight months pregnant. Never mind that there's literally no legal process for "immediate revocation" of permanent residency. And definitely never mind that pesky thing called "due process" that supposedly applies to everyone in America. Details are for losers who are illegally refusing to buy a Tesla.
According to a Lawfare piece by Matthew Boaz (an assistant professor at the University of Kentucky J. David Rosenberg College of Law who previously represented immigration detainees), the government seems to be trying out their shiny "adverse foreign policy consequences" deportation tool:
While it may seem surprising that political speech can serve as the basis for deportability, under the McCarran-Walter Act of 1952 (also known as the Immigration and Nationality Act), political beliefs have served as a grounds for deportability, preventing the entry of celebrated novelists for their espoused political beliefs.
The article explains that Secretary of State Marco Rubio can personally determine that someone's "presence would compromise a compelling U.S. foreign policy interest." Though apparently this power comes with an important limitation:
It is the intent of the conference committee that this authority would be used sparingly and not merely because there is a likelihood that an alien will make certain remarks about the United States or its policies…
Sparingly! You hear that? Like saffron or nuclear codes! But ICE apparently didn't get the memo as they've already whisked Khalil from New York to Louisiana faster than you can say "jurisdiction shopping," presumably hoping the Fifth Circuit will be friendlier to their "we don't like his opinions" legal strategy.
In America, constitutional rights are like those "unlimited" data plans – restrictions apply, void where politically inconvenient.
