I would argue that it is a pretty high bar to assert that Khalil being within the borders of America somehow 'compromises', which is the actual word used, US foreign policy at all, much less does it severely.
As far as I'm aware, he hasn't even been protesting about US foreign policy. At all. I'm sure he doesn't agree with it, but he hasn't been protesting that. (Not that we should accept the premise that one person protesting a policy would compromise it, it's just that isn't what he's been doing.)
He's been protesting about the investment policy of the _private_ University he attends. People may not like that, hell he might have even broken some laws, perhaps even laws he could be charged with, but in no possible manner does that compromise US foreign policy.
And he does actually have the right to challenge this in court.
The commenter archive features may be temporarily disabled at times.
I would argue that it is a pretty high bar to assert that Khalil being within the borders of America somehow 'compromises', which is the actual word used, US foreign policy at all, much less does it severely.
As far as I'm aware, he hasn't even been protesting about US foreign policy. At all. I'm sure he doesn't agree with it, but he hasn't been protesting that. (Not that we should accept the premise that one person protesting a policy would compromise it, it's just that isn't what he's been doing.)
He's been protesting about the investment policy of the _private_ University he attends. People may not like that, hell he might have even broken some laws, perhaps even laws he could be charged with, but in no possible manner does that compromise US foreign policy.
And he does actually have the right to challenge this in court.