Columbia definitely narced on him, they wanted a pest gone. BTW, I hope Jews who wanted the crackdown on the encampments and free speech understand how screwed they are too. When Trump and MAGA are done going after their scapegoats, they will find others. Also, when Trump and MAGA eventually lose, people will unfairly blame all Jews for the aftermath.
We see that as soon as fpotus blurts out yet another illegal or unconstitutional act, the goons carry it out regardless of the illegality. Fpotus stated all foreign students in the US should be deported if they engage in protests, and voilà, ICE or some other law enforcement rushes to enact it. We are in a police state. Now it's immigrants being targeted. Next.....
In another lifetime the ADL would have been one of the groups criticizing this kind of thing because the long history of Judaism has shown that you do not support people being dragged away in the dead of night.
These battles have been faught before: the 1918 Alien Act, the deportation of Emma Goldman and Alex Berkman (in this case, both Jews), and subsequent litigation helped birth the ACLU and protections of our first amendment rights. Every 100 years, we have all new people. It's not surprising that it takes ongoing vigilience to protect our rights. https://jwa.org/thisweek/dec/21/1919/emma-goldman
AFAIK, Khalil was not arrested or detained by the NYPD or other local authorities. The university alleged misconduct but backed down from acting on the allegation. He would have had a right to protest even if arrested, even if the misconduct had resulted in sanctions. How is this not a violation of Article 1 of the Constitution?
Part of the current problem is that huge numbers of people have been brainwashed (too willingly) to believe that the Democrats have been doing unlawful and unconstitutional things for years, so now they think they’re sonehow getting justice.
"This is fundamentally about the application of First Amendment principles to political disagreement." Not everyone agrees that this is a First Amendment issue, but I agree with your general point. This is obviously political, and, history teaches, that's a huge problem, for everyone:
1) terrorist organizations should be annihilated. 2) Any non-citizen supporting a terrorist organization domestically should be treated as a threat. 3) Mr Khalil was allegedly protesting against Israel and for Hamas directly inciting violence against jews. 4) Hamas is a terrorist organization given their declared genocidal stance against israel. This is not a simple first amendment issue as you disingenuously pose it. I am willing to hear you out but which of these propositions do you disagree with?
I agree that it's not just a First Amendment issue. My questions are (a) whether you think this was politically motivated; and (b) whether you think that matters.
I agree with everything you said in your statement in general as for citizens of US. But the issue about terrorist organizations need to be addressed differently, don’t you agree?
That’s pretty rich if, as I assume, you’re talking about the US - a nation of foreigners. If you want to apply the law differently to different people you might one day find yourself the last man standing, which might be a lonely and not very enviable position.
jasonT, surely you’re not conflating “foreigner” and “legal resident”. One’s a cool band, and the other is entitled to virtually EVERY CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION that citizens enjoy
Yes, correct—unfortunately, the single word doesn’t somehow prove your point.
A legal citizen is still covered by the 1st amendment’s protection of unpopular speech.
And while a green cards can definitely be revoked, that must be done via process by immigration court. Certainly not by an ICE agent on your doorstep asking his superiors on his phone what he should do.
The Khalil story and the partisan nature of the commentary sheds light on why I'm not optimistic about where we are as a civilization and the direction of travel, broadly speaking.
The conservatives support free speech, except concerning Palestine and Israel, at which point they're authoritarian. And progressives support free speech, except when it's contrary to the institutional narrative, at which point they're authoritarian.
And if we're old school liberals, then basically we're screwed.
Columbia definitely narced on him, they wanted a pest gone. BTW, I hope Jews who wanted the crackdown on the encampments and free speech understand how screwed they are too. When Trump and MAGA are done going after their scapegoats, they will find others. Also, when Trump and MAGA eventually lose, people will unfairly blame all Jews for the aftermath.
This is a fabulous article!
We see that as soon as fpotus blurts out yet another illegal or unconstitutional act, the goons carry it out regardless of the illegality. Fpotus stated all foreign students in the US should be deported if they engage in protests, and voilà, ICE or some other law enforcement rushes to enact it. We are in a police state. Now it's immigrants being targeted. Next.....
In another lifetime the ADL would have been one of the groups criticizing this kind of thing because the long history of Judaism has shown that you do not support people being dragged away in the dead of night.
But now, they are silent, or even cheering it on.
These battles have been faught before: the 1918 Alien Act, the deportation of Emma Goldman and Alex Berkman (in this case, both Jews), and subsequent litigation helped birth the ACLU and protections of our first amendment rights. Every 100 years, we have all new people. It's not surprising that it takes ongoing vigilience to protect our rights. https://jwa.org/thisweek/dec/21/1919/emma-goldman
AFAIK, Khalil was not arrested or detained by the NYPD or other local authorities. The university alleged misconduct but backed down from acting on the allegation. He would have had a right to protest even if arrested, even if the misconduct had resulted in sanctions. How is this not a violation of Article 1 of the Constitution?
Is anyone organizing to protest at at the detention center in Elizabeth, NJ where he’s being detained?
Wait apparently his wife went to visit him and he’s not there? Where is he then? WTF?
Part of the current problem is that huge numbers of people have been brainwashed (too willingly) to believe that the Democrats have been doing unlawful and unconstitutional things for years, so now they think they’re sonehow getting justice.
"This is fundamentally about the application of First Amendment principles to political disagreement." Not everyone agrees that this is a First Amendment issue, but I agree with your general point. This is obviously political, and, history teaches, that's a huge problem, for everyone:
https://ancientwisdommodernlives.com/p/democracy-oligarchy-free-speech
1) terrorist organizations should be annihilated. 2) Any non-citizen supporting a terrorist organization domestically should be treated as a threat. 3) Mr Khalil was allegedly protesting against Israel and for Hamas directly inciting violence against jews. 4) Hamas is a terrorist organization given their declared genocidal stance against israel. This is not a simple first amendment issue as you disingenuously pose it. I am willing to hear you out but which of these propositions do you disagree with?
I agree that it's not just a First Amendment issue. My questions are (a) whether you think this was politically motivated; and (b) whether you think that matters.
I agree with everything you said in your statement in general as for citizens of US. But the issue about terrorist organizations need to be addressed differently, don’t you agree?
Donald ‘there’s good people on both sides ‘Trump has no credibility on the issue of antisemitism.
A foreigner is a guest and ought to behave as a guest. They can be asked to leave at any time and for any reason.
That’s pretty rich if, as I assume, you’re talking about the US - a nation of foreigners. If you want to apply the law differently to different people you might one day find yourself the last man standing, which might be a lonely and not very enviable position.
I'm sure you understand the difference between foreigner and citizen.
jasonT, surely you’re not conflating “foreigner” and “legal resident”. One’s a cool band, and the other is entitled to virtually EVERY CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION that citizens enjoy
Virtually.
Yes, correct—unfortunately, the single word doesn’t somehow prove your point.
A legal citizen is still covered by the 1st amendment’s protection of unpopular speech.
And while a green cards can definitely be revoked, that must be done via process by immigration court. Certainly not by an ICE agent on your doorstep asking his superiors on his phone what he should do.
I suspect that question will work its way through the courts.
Yikes
The Khalil story and the partisan nature of the commentary sheds light on why I'm not optimistic about where we are as a civilization and the direction of travel, broadly speaking.
The conservatives support free speech, except concerning Palestine and Israel, at which point they're authoritarian. And progressives support free speech, except when it's contrary to the institutional narrative, at which point they're authoritarian.
And if we're old school liberals, then basically we're screwed.
Inject this directly into my veins. 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸💪🏼
Do you have e a date of his arrest?
Any organization defending him at the moment?