Future Retirement Success
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks

Future Retirement Success

Investing

US Citizens Don’t Have First Amendment Rights If Noncitizens Don’t

by April 15, 2025
April 15, 2025
US Citizens Don’t Have First Amendment Rights If Noncitizens Don’t

David J. Bier

I just had a disturbing conversation with a green card holder—a legal permanent resident of the United States. He had asked if he thought traveling internationally was wise for him as someone who has criticized President Trump and Israel and whether he should avoid any further criticism and/​or remove any past criticism from his social media before he travels.

In a free society, the answer would be: “You should say whatever you want, criticize whoever you want, and not worry about traveling because the government cannot punish you for what you say.” But until the Supreme Court reaffirms that the First Amendment protects noncitizens in the United States from banishment for their speech—and until President Trump obeys the Supreme Court—we do not live in a free country.

The Trump administration is revoking green cards and visas solely based on speech. Individuals are explicitly being targeted based on “beliefs, statements, or associations” that are “lawful within the United States” but which Secretary of State Marco Rubio has deemed “adverse to the foreign policy of the United States.” Even authoring an op-ed criticizing a foreign government’s foreign policy can now trigger visa revocation. The administration is also searching electronic devices at ports of entry for evidence of “adverse” views.

This reality meant that I had to tell the green card holder that it would be prudent to delete any criticism and refrain from further criticism if he wanted to limit the possibility of becoming a target and be able to stay in America with his family. When I say I had to say this, I mean it was the direct result of government intervention in society. I could not encourage him to speak his mind. I couldn’t, in good faith, encourage him to criticize President Trump, though I believe there is much to criticize. It was the first time in my life that I felt the government had coerced me (a US citizen) into suppressing what I wanted to say.

Every restriction on the free speech rights of noncitizens is also a restriction on the free speech rights of Americans. For one thing, free speech is a protection for listeners as much as it is for speakers, and in that way, it undermines everyone’s right to hear when the government shuts down anyone’s right to speak freely.

The threat to US citizens becomes even more acute when they know a noncitizen. Should you bring a noncitizen family member or friend to a protest? Would you feel as confident protesting the abuses of the US government or an allied foreign government if you were married to a legal permanent resident? Should you share articles critical of the administration’s foreign policy with them? What happens if they reshare, comment on, or like your post?

I know noncitizen researchers who study trade, immigration, national security, and other matters of intense public interest and debate. Should they and their employers be concerned about publishing research that Secretary of State Marco Rubio could deem “adverse to the foreign policy interest of the United States”? Unfortunately, the answer is yes. 

Whether it is a serious threat or not, the administration’s attack on free speech has forced people to seriously consider questions that they should never have to even think about in a free society. As the American Enterprise Institute’s Stan Veuger has noted, there is no one who is properly “off-limits” from the speech crackdown:

Every single person who knows a noncitizen in the United States will have to consider this problem—not just “adverse speech” according to this president right now but “adverse speech” according to any future president that wields the same power. Consider that none of the noncitizens targeted by the US government today would have had any way of discovering that the US government would start deporting people for what they said when they said it months ago. In fact, the immigration charges against these dissidents still don’t even include any specific statements or actions.

This uncertainty about what is even prohibited is one reason why President Trump’s sister, US District Judge Maryanne Trump Barry, declared that the law was unconstitutionally vague in 1996. She quoted the Supreme Court: “Living under a rule of law entails various suppositions, one of which is all persons are entitled to be informed as to what the State commands and forbids.” No one could ever predict precisely what conduct could be deemed “adverse to” US foreign policy in the future. Unfortunately, Judge Barry’s decision was overturned on technical grounds unrelated to her constitutional points, and the Supreme Court has never ruled on the issue.

Zooming out from those direct effects on speech, this assault on noncitizens undermines the moral and philosophical foundations that are necessary for a robust defense of free speech for US citizens. The administration’s defenders cannot explain why free speech is good for Americans but bad for noncitizens, so they just revert to the argument that the government has the power to crack down on dissident speech, so it should because it is obvious that we shouldn’t want “adverse” speech in America.

But once we accept that the government knows The Truth and should enforce The Truth with guns, why should its efforts be limited only to noncitizens? Clearing the house of problematic noncitizen speakers won’t solve the problem of “bad speech,” since the number of “deluded” US citizens outnumber the deluded noncitizens by an order of magnitude.

It is no surprise then that President Trump’s administration is threatening US citizens’ free speech rights in many other ways, such as threatening arrests of people who inform noncitizens of their constitutional rights, filing shakedown lawsuits against media companies, attacking law firms that defend unpopular clients, canceling contracts in states where governors have criticized Trump, threatening sanctions against media companies for negative coverage of him, banning disfavored media from the White House, and sanctioning federal contractors for use of the words “diversity, equity, or inclusion.”

The administration’s assault on noncitizen speech reveals a much deeper problem. A significant portion of the American public has simply forgotten the value of free speech entirely, and that’s the biggest threat to free speech of all.

0
FacebookTwitterGoogle +Pinterest
previous post
First female Mexico-born rep targets indictment-plagued Democrat in House GOP comeback bid
next post
Still Out of Reach: Why Effective Opioid Treatment Isn’t Getting to Patients

You may also like

Biden Hikes Corporate Tax Expenditures 92%

April 1, 2024

Bank and Crypto Runs: F(ac)TX vs Fiction

November 21, 2022

When “Fairness” Becomes Censorship: The Push to Regulate Social...

April 11, 2025

USTR Report on China’s Maritime Subsidies Offers Thin...

January 24, 2025

Book Review: The Menace of Fiscal QE

June 26, 2023

American Compass Dystopia: The “Decline” In Investment

July 19, 2023

From Lexington to the Jury Box: 250 Years...

April 21, 2025

It’s National School Choice Week!

January 22, 2024

FERC’s Order No. 1920: A Costly Shell Game

May 16, 2024

Friday Feature: Plaza Academy

January 31, 2025

    Get free access to all of the retirement secrets and income strategies from our experts! or Join The Exclusive Subscription Today And Get the Premium Articles Acess for Free

    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.

    Recent Posts

    • 7 Hidden Corners of Thailand Worth Adding to Your Travel List

      June 21, 2025
    • On the Expansion of Executive Power: Addendum II

      June 21, 2025
    • ROBERT MAGINNIS: Don’t be misled—Iran isn’t days away from a nuclear bomb

      June 21, 2025
    • Americans agree with Trump that Iran poses threat to United States: poll

      June 21, 2025
    • Arrest of Chinese nationals in swing state, Israel’s fight with Iran are ‘wake up’ call on CCP threat: experts

      June 21, 2025
    • Petition launched as 4 in 5 UK businesses face soaring energy bills without price cap

      June 21, 2025

    Categories

    • Business (8,277)
    • Investing (2,058)
    • Politics (15,727)
    • Stocks (3,158)
    • About us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions

    Disclaimer: futureretirementsuccess.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

    Copyright © 2025 futureretirementsuccess.com | All Rights Reserved