Columbia, Mahmoud Khalil, and Protest Expectations

Issac Faulk

Issac Faulk is the pseudonym of a published and experienced foreign policy writer, currently in exile.

You may also like...

15 Responses

  1. DavidTC
    Ignored
    says:

    What a completely grotesque post.Report

    • Issac Faulk in reply to DavidTC
      Ignored
      says:

      thx for reading. doubt we have the same definition of grotesque. my post is realistic, unbiased and unforgiving but it is not crass, brutish, ignorant, vulgar or anything resembling grotesque.Report

  2. Philip H
    Ignored
    says:

    So betraying one of our founding nations principles strengthens our foreign policy?

    That’s … something.Report

    • Issac Faulk in reply to Philip H
      Ignored
      says:

      always enjoy your notes, phil. what was betrayed? buddy of mine was sent back to argentina because in 2008 he bought weed from an undercover cop. grad student and expecting father. judge told him he was here to be a student not a drug addict and sent him home. if you’re going to make americans regret extending the visa to learn, we can just give it to someone else. pretty simple, I think.Report

      • Chris Gerrib in reply to Issac Faulk
        Ignored
        says:

        Key distinction between your buddy and Kahil is “a judge said.” What judge has ruled in this case? It seems in fact that the Trump administration was trying to avoid going in front of a judge.

        Bottom line – if ANY President can deport a legal permanent resident because of a protest, then the First Amendment has been scrapped.Report

        • Issac Faulk in reply to Chris Gerrib
          Ignored
          says:

          he was not some dreamer who played high school football in america and owns a roofing company. he chose common cause with the enemy and placed himself in this position. culture of martyrdom and whatnot. you have no idea where he’s been or what he’s done. 100% certainty the israelis had him on their radar before we did. thx for reading.Report

          • Chris Gerrib in reply to Issac Faulk
            Ignored
            says:

            If he’s really such a bad guy, why not tell it to a judge?Report

          • Philip H in reply to Issac Faulk
            Ignored
            says:

            What the Israeli’s know or don’t know is irrelevant. He is a lawful permanent resident and this subject to US jurisdiction and given the protection of the US Constitution. If the political speech of neonaz.is is protected by that constitution (and they are direct enemies of the US and its citizens), then his speech is equally protected.Report

      • Philip H in reply to Issac Faulk
        Ignored
        says:

        Sending someone picking for political speech you don’t agree with is a direct assault on the First Amendment.Report

  3. Jaybird
    Ignored
    says:

    There was a story a few years back about a protest where a bunch of protestors blocked a subway train. They prevented the subway car from taking off.

    The story went on to talk about how some of the riders went vigilante and forcibly removed the protestors so the subway could get back to business.

    This was described as the vigilantes removing the free speech rights of the people who were trying protest.

    The question of whether there were any other rights of note in the entire situation went unremarked.

    A fine trick.Report

  4. LeeEsq
    Ignored
    says:

    Resident immigration lawyer here. The immigration lawyer community believes that DHS is going argue one of these two theories for removal Khalil.

    1. There is an obscure provision in the INA that allows the Secretary of State to remove non-citizens who are believed to be foreign policy embarrassments for the United States. This is a very rare but very broad power.

    https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/eoir/legacy/2014/07/25/3400.pdf

    2. They will argue that he made a material misrepresentation in his immigration paperwork by saying no to the questions regarding to material support for terrorism when he clearly supports the terrorist organizations of Hamas and Hezbollah. Material support for terrorism is again given a very broad definition under the law.Report

    • Issac Faulk in reply to LeeEsq
      Ignored
      says:

      lee, what a a wonderful contribution. thank you. ”material” is gonna go for a walk, id wager.Report

    • PD Shaw in reply to LeeEsq
      Ignored
      says:

      According to filings in the district court, he was charged with the first theory. Perhaps the second theory is a fallback, but my impression is they want to charge him based solely upon the Secretary of State’s decision and fight any effort to review that decision or any materials relied upon the Secretary in forming it. OTOH, Khalil’s lawyers appear to be fighting deportation on Constitutional principles, the first and fifth amendments, which don’t require looking at the facts concerning Khalil.

      All that said, it doesn’t seem to me that there will be much discovery in this case, certainly not pertaining to who is paying his lawyers (some of whom identify as pro bono).Report

      • Issac Faulk in reply to PD Shaw
        Ignored
        says:

        maybe not, on the discovery the frame of reference to that was a case based on a mosque suing the press. after the george mason case that was started in dec 2024, they have data marked of protesters planning. not a ridiculous leap to think there is something similar with khalil. he may not want to go to court either.

        see, the part I do think is interesting is that it’s rubio’s authority. glad you brought that up. there is another case that’s named him and i don’t know how to even look at theories based on what’s filed.Report

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *