Immigration

Lerxst1992

Go Beavers said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Go Beavers said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Go Beavers said:

Lerxst1992 said:

“ Not if certain posters have their way.”

That comment again demonstrates an inability to understand words, comments, facts and ideas.

one would hope commenters understand the difference between a citizen, a visa holder, an undocumented here illegally, and those who lied to the govt to get here to organize violence against American kids.

forget about hoping extremists can understand the difference between an admitted mistake by the govt and the rights of people lying to be here to organize hatred and violence against Americans.

And when the government exerts its authority with anyone in the last paragraph, it requires evidence. 

Definitely not “anyone “

MSNBC Guest Admits Pro-Hamas Protesters’ Visa Revocation Likely To Stand

Harold Hutchison

March 28, 2025 3:55 PM ET

Former Clinton administration Justice Department official Harry Litman said Friday that Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s decision to revoke the green card of pro-Hamas protesters would likely be upheld by the courts.   

United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) tookMahmoud Khalil, who reportedly led pro-Hamas protests at Columbia University, into custody after his green card was revoked by Rubio. Litman said that the revocation of Khalil’s green card, as well as the visas of other pro-Hamas protesters in the U.S., was something courts would probably not “second-guess.” (RELATED: Jonathan Turley Highlights Trump Admin’s Strongest Arguments In Bid To Deport Pro-Hamas Protester)

“Khalil has a green card, so did the student, excuse me, picked up this morning. There’s a regulation, Jose, passed in the height of the Cold War that says if the secretary of state makes a finding that someone is — there are two different things going on here, aiding terrorists, that’s what they say the latest student picked up did, or somehow a risk to national security, they can have their visa revoked,” Litman told MSNBC host Jose Diaz-Balart. “And there’s a lot of law that says they’re not going to second guess or they may not second guess Rubio’s judgment about that fact, are they a risk to national security?”

WATCH:

“So in the latest case, there’s going to be a frontal attack on the actual regulation because it is very clear that what’s happened here is based only on First Amendment activity. Khalil was one of the organizers of the demonstration and the person picked up this morning wrote an op-ed,” Litman continued. “And then based on that, Rubio made this judgment. It’s really that judgment and the way it dovetails with First Amendment activity that gives pause here. But that may be the aspect of the regulatory scheme that is hardest to challenge.”

Pro-Hamas demonstrations at multiple universities and colleges have taken shape since the Oct. 7, 2023 attack by Hamas that killed over 1,200 people in Israel. Protesters have occupied buildings, blocked Jewish students from parts of campus and have chanted a slogan that implies a desire to wipe out Israel. Rubio called for the visas of foreign students who supported Hamas’ actions to be revoked during an Oct. 17, 2023, appearance on “The Ingraham Angle” while he was still a Florida senator.

“The law says if you are a supporter of a terrorist organization you shouldn’t even have a visa,” Rubio told Fox News host Laura Ingraham during the appearance. “So now, once you get that visa, if you identify yourself as a Hamas supporter, then you should have your visa canceled and you should be removed from the country.”

Rubio, since becoming secretary of state, has revoked more than 300 student visas, though Litman focused on two students, Khalil, and Rumeysa Ozturk, who was detained for “activities in support of Hamas.” These cases are currently being contested in federal court, the Associated Press reported.

Litman, who resigned as an opinion writer for Los Angeles Times after claiming the outlet was “appeasing” Trump, said the courts would not “second guess” Rubio’s decision to revoke the visas. (RELATED: ‘Your Visa Should Be Yanked’: Marco Rubio Calls For Deporting Hamas Supporters From US)

“There is precedent for using the law without questioning the secretary of state. Secretary of State signs a piece of paper. I think this person is a risk to national security,” Litman said. “Now, remember, we’re talking about immigration status. And as Rubio was saying, you know, it’s very different to revoke a visa, especially a student visa, even a green card than it is to charge someone with a crime.”

“But the precedent is there for secretary of state to determine that someone is a danger if they — if they continue to have their immigration status permitting them to be here. I think the real thing that is animating these protesters is they think from what we know, ain’t a lot to suggest that these two people are serious risk to national security,” Litman continued. “But what the reg says is that’s a call for Rubio to make, not the courts. The courts can do other things like, are you the person named? Is the regulation constitutional? But this core judgment by Rubio is going to be very hard to overturn.”

Do you think in a hearing a judge isn’t going to ask how they were identified to be “pro Hamas”? 

They’ve already said so publicly. Khalid was an organizer of the Columbia protests and was here on a student visa at that time. Those protests were not peaceful. IMO he is very unlikely to win his immigration hearing. For many judges, the word of Rubio will be enough. You can research specific judges records. There is a reason why they are transporting deportees to the south.

The tufts student might be more difficult for the DOJ as her identifying behavior may have only been writing an op ed to organize students to support forcing school policy . The DOJ is not disclosing whether she had ties to the anti Israel protests and student BDS vote last year that turned nasty, with reports of  “vitriolic antisemitism” expressed by students at the vote. ( Taunts included “Israel controls the entire world,” “Go back to Israel, we don’t want you here!” and “You stink,” according to Brawer. Jewish on Campus, which collects anonymous testimonies of antisemitism in universities, said it had been reported that one student was spat on.)

If she had ties to those protests, she very well could lose her visa. That is not a peaceful protest.

Phones are everywhere. A lot of these protests were not peaceful. The word of the sec state and documentation that the alleged actions occurred may be enough evidence to revoke a student visa.

So yes, the judge will ask for evidence in a hearing about the government exerting its authority. 

And this is an immigration hearing, not a jury trial requiring guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The hearing could be about only whether the detainee abided by terms of their visa, and the opinion of sec state regarding national security. 

Go Beavers

Lerxst1992 said:

Go Beavers said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Go Beavers said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Go Beavers said:

Lerxst1992 said:

“ Not if certain posters have their way.”

That comment again demonstrates an inability to understand words, comments, facts and ideas.

one would hope commenters understand the difference between a citizen, a visa holder, an undocumented here illegally, and those who lied to the govt to get here to organize violence against American kids.

forget about hoping extremists can understand the difference between an admitted mistake by the govt and the rights of people lying to be here to organize hatred and violence against Americans.

And when the government exerts its authority with anyone in the last paragraph, it requires evidence. 

Definitely not “anyone “

MSNBC Guest Admits Pro-Hamas Protesters’ Visa Revocation Likely To Stand

Harold Hutchison

March 28, 2025 3:55 PM ET

Former Clinton administration Justice Department official Harry Litman said Friday that Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s decision to revoke the green card of pro-Hamas protesters would likely be upheld by the courts.   

United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) tookMahmoud Khalil, who reportedly led pro-Hamas protests at Columbia University, into custody after his green card was revoked by Rubio. Litman said that the revocation of Khalil’s green card, as well as the visas of other pro-Hamas protesters in the U.S., was something courts would probably not “second-guess.” (RELATED: Jonathan Turley Highlights Trump Admin’s Strongest Arguments In Bid To Deport Pro-Hamas Protester)

“Khalil has a green card, so did the student, excuse me, picked up this morning. There’s a regulation, Jose, passed in the height of the Cold War that says if the secretary of state makes a finding that someone is — there are two different things going on here, aiding terrorists, that’s what they say the latest student picked up did, or somehow a risk to national security, they can have their visa revoked,” Litman told MSNBC host Jose Diaz-Balart. “And there’s a lot of law that says they’re not going to second guess or they may not second guess Rubio’s judgment about that fact, are they a risk to national security?”

WATCH:

“So in the latest case, there’s going to be a frontal attack on the actual regulation because it is very clear that what’s happened here is based only on First Amendment activity. Khalil was one of the organizers of the demonstration and the person picked up this morning wrote an op-ed,” Litman continued. “And then based on that, Rubio made this judgment. It’s really that judgment and the way it dovetails with First Amendment activity that gives pause here. But that may be the aspect of the regulatory scheme that is hardest to challenge.”

Pro-Hamas demonstrations at multiple universities and colleges have taken shape since the Oct. 7, 2023 attack by Hamas that killed over 1,200 people in Israel. Protesters have occupied buildings, blocked Jewish students from parts of campus and have chanted a slogan that implies a desire to wipe out Israel. Rubio called for the visas of foreign students who supported Hamas’ actions to be revoked during an Oct. 17, 2023, appearance on “The Ingraham Angle” while he was still a Florida senator.

“The law says if you are a supporter of a terrorist organization you shouldn’t even have a visa,” Rubio told Fox News host Laura Ingraham during the appearance. “So now, once you get that visa, if you identify yourself as a Hamas supporter, then you should have your visa canceled and you should be removed from the country.”

Rubio, since becoming secretary of state, has revoked more than 300 student visas, though Litman focused on two students, Khalil, and Rumeysa Ozturk, who was detained for “activities in support of Hamas.” These cases are currently being contested in federal court, the Associated Press reported.

Litman, who resigned as an opinion writer for Los Angeles Times after claiming the outlet was “appeasing” Trump, said the courts would not “second guess” Rubio’s decision to revoke the visas. (RELATED: ‘Your Visa Should Be Yanked’: Marco Rubio Calls For Deporting Hamas Supporters From US)

“There is precedent for using the law without questioning the secretary of state. Secretary of State signs a piece of paper. I think this person is a risk to national security,” Litman said. “Now, remember, we’re talking about immigration status. And as Rubio was saying, you know, it’s very different to revoke a visa, especially a student visa, even a green card than it is to charge someone with a crime.”

“But the precedent is there for secretary of state to determine that someone is a danger if they — if they continue to have their immigration status permitting them to be here. I think the real thing that is animating these protesters is they think from what we know, ain’t a lot to suggest that these two people are serious risk to national security,” Litman continued. “But what the reg says is that’s a call for Rubio to make, not the courts. The courts can do other things like, are you the person named? Is the regulation constitutional? But this core judgment by Rubio is going to be very hard to overturn.”

Do you think in a hearing a judge isn’t going to ask how they were identified to be “pro Hamas”? 

They’ve already said so publicly. Khalid was an organizer of the Columbia protests and was here on a student visa at that time. Those protests were not peaceful. IMO he is very unlikely to win his immigration hearing. For many judges, the word of Rubio will be enough. You can research specific judges records. There is a reason why they are transporting deportees to the south.

The tufts student might be more difficult for the DOJ as her identifying behavior may have only been writing an op ed to organize students to support forcing school policy . The DOJ is not disclosing whether she had ties to the anti Israel protests and student BDS vote last year that turned nasty, with reports of  “vitriolic antisemitism” expressed by students at the vote. ( Taunts included “Israel controls the entire world,” “Go back to Israel, we don’t want you here!” and “You stink,” according to Brawer. Jewish on Campus, which collects anonymous testimonies of antisemitism in universities, said it had been reported that one student was spat on.)

If she had ties to those protests, she very well could lose her visa. That is not a peaceful protest.

Phones are everywhere. A lot of these protests were not peaceful. The word of the sec state and documentation that the alleged actions occurred may be enough evidence to revoke a student visa.

So yes, the judge will ask for evidence in a hearing about the government exerting its authority. 

And this is an immigration hearing, not a jury trial requiring guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The hearing could be about only whether the detainee abided by terms of their visa, and the opinion of sec state regarding national security. 

I’m aware it’s not a criminal trial. So when you hear looney tunes libs voice complaints about the government sending people away and making them disappear essentially, the complaint is about a lack of hearing, aka due process. Something that used to not be exclusive to the libs, but now is. 

Tim Simmons

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Perhaps trump won because of inflation, but voters certainly didn’t enjoy seeing undocumented immigrants housed in $500 per night nyc hotels or schools shut down and graduations canceled to support a hostile government, perhaps two. With taxpayers funding both the hotels and security for violent anti American protests.

If I know America, most Americans didn't give a shit about this because it didn't affect them, if they even knew about it at all.

Yep, fake news, taxpayers spending billions on migrant hotels and no one knows or cares

I didn’t say no one. I said “most”, meaning a large majority but not all. And I stand by it.

Tim Simmons

I mean, at this point, I don’t even know what you’re advocating for other than just wanting to fight with a couple of posters here.

tbergs

Forum Bill Maher right now.

josevolution

Who’s going to take these jobs? Johnny Billy or how about Tommy down the street? Who’s going to put a new roof on your house 
https://apnews.com/article/immigration-raid-bellingham-washington-roofing-company-73dfd3d3ca1af12503108616f3726e12Immigration officials raid Washington state roofing company and arrest over 3 dozen people

Tim Simmons

The children will.

https://www.wlrn.org/government-politics/2025-04-01/florida-child-labor-rollback-bill-amended-to-allow-some-13-year-olds-to-work

Just preying on the weakest of the bunch.

mace1229

Tim Simmons said:

The children will.

https://www.wlrn.org/government-politics/2025-04-01/florida-child-labor-rollback-bill-amended-to-allow-some-13-year-olds-to-work

Just preying on the weakest of the bunch.

Actually it doesn't sound that bad.

"...and ease rules for 14- and 15-year-olds who are enrolled in homeschool, virtual education, or those who have already graduated. The house version would allow 13-year-olds to work during the summer of the year they turn 14."

When I was in high school I had 15 year old friends working. They had to get a work permit from school and were only allowed to work certain hours per week. This only allows 13-year olds to work the summer of the year they turn 14, so they are only a few months shy of 14. And it doesn't describe what the restrictions are, I'm sure none of them are allowed full time jobs.
I'm not against a 14 year old who is going to virtual school to work 10 hours a week in some circumstances, what's wrong with that? When my kid is 14 and if he wants to work at a car wash for the summer or something, I have no problem with that. Better than sitting around playing video games and watching YouTube all day, that's for sure. And he wouldn't even meet the criteria and be allowed to.

Forcing a 13 year old to work 40 hours picking fruit would be another thing, but that doesn't seem like what is what's being pushed. 

HughFreakingDillon

tbergs said:

Forum Bill Maher right now.

Wow. Holy crap he is. 

Lerxst1992

Tim Simmons said:

I mean, at this point, I don’t even know what you’re advocating for other than just wanting to fight with a couple of posters here.

almost every comment I post gets trolled from someone overseas and someone else that thinks war is a joke (or that it’s my fault for wanting the countries to negotiate a treaty) and the “fight” is my fault. The personal attacks here are endless. Mentioning the rules gets mocked. But it’s me. Remember all the moderate Dems that used to comment here who rarely do anymore?

This forum has responded to trump by moving extremely to the far left, which is no way to reach purple and lean red states for senatorial and electoral votes. That’s the extend of my political passion. Almost all articles and ideas posted here are representative of far left views and often omit significant facts. Say anything contrary gets you a personal attack.

the “fake news “ posted on amt is astounding. Most posts here, if not all ,  regarding  (the original immigrant story) Khalils detainment claimed he broke no laws and he has the exact same rights keeping his visa as citizens. there is significant fallacy there and omission of facts in that view. Bringing that up here causes arguments and personal attacks.

Halifax2TheMax

Give “the personal attacks” a fucking rest already. Posters disagree with your posts and opinion. 

Tim Simmons

mace1229 said:

Tim Simmons said:

The children will.

https://www.wlrn.org/government-politics/2025-04-01/florida-child-labor-rollback-bill-amended-to-allow-some-13-year-olds-to-work

Just preying on the weakest of the bunch.

Actually it doesn't sound that bad.

"...and ease rules for 14- and 15-year-olds who are enrolled in homeschool, virtual education, or those who have already graduated. The house version would allow 13-year-olds to work during the summer of the year they turn 14."

When I was in high school I had 15 year old friends working. They had to get a work permit from school and were only allowed to work certain hours per week. This only allows 13-year olds to work the summer they turn 14, so they are only a few months shy of 14. And it doesn't describe what the restrictions are, I'm sure none of them are allowed full time jobs.
I'm not against a 14 year old who is going to virtual school to work 10 hours a week in some circumstances, what's wrong with that? When my kid is 14 and if he wants to work at a car wash for the summer or something, I have no problem with that. Better than sitting around playing video games and watching YouTube all day, that's for sure. And he wouldn't even meet the criteria and be allowed to.

Forcing a 13 year old to work 40 hours picking fruit would be another thing, but that doesn't seem that is what's being pushed. 

Its not forcing the kids to do anything, if anything its removing protections to squeeze more out of the dollar. This seeks to take advantage of households who need these kids to work. I'm all for letting kids have jobs and ease into a workforce. If anything there aren't enough businesses that want to take that risk of employing teens. But this moves the needle closer to exploitation.

The parts that this particular news story leaves out is eliminating working time restrictions (currently 6am to 11pm for anyone under 18). They want to remove a 30 min break, usually for meals" for teens that work more than 4 hours. 

heres a better breakdown. Granted the bill is being revised, but there are some weird concessions in the current structure. 
https://www.pnj.com/story/news/2025/03/25/florida-child-labor-law-bill-2025/82657143007/

Again, I'm all for kids getting a job when they want or if the family needs it. But they are kids with responsibilities to school too. And DeSantis saying that they would be replacing immigrant labor is just giving the game away.

Tim Simmons

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

I mean, at this point, I don’t even know what you’re advocating for other than just wanting to fight with a couple of posters here.

almost every comment I post gets trolled from someone overseas and someone else that thinks war is a joke (or that it’s my fault for wanting the countries to negotiate a treaty) and the “fight” is my fault. The personal attacks here are endless. Mentioning the rules gets mocked. But it’s me. Remember all the moderate Dems that used to comment here who rarely do anymore?

This forum has responded to trump by moving extremely to the far left, which is no way to reach purple and lean red states for senatorial and electoral votes. That’s the extend of my political passion. Almost all articles and ideas posted here are representative of far left views and often omit significant facts. Say anything contrary gets you a personal attack.

the “fake news “ posted on amt is astounding. Most posts here, if not all ,  regarding  (the original immigrant story) Khalils detainment claimed he broke no laws and he has the exact same rights keeping his visa as citizens. there is significant fallacy there and omission of facts in that view. Bringing that up here causes arguments and personal attacks.

I mean, this place doesn't move any needle. Yes, I do wish every post would be fair and include all relevant information for better discussion, but also, we don't get that in the broader world. I will say you approach the discussions here with better faith than other posters who are no longer with us pushing back on more progressive polocies.

Lerxst1992

tbergs said:

Forum Bill Maher right now.

Bingo and thank you

five years ago I stopped watching his show because I thought it was wrong to blame the Democratic Party for the extremism and wokeness on the left. 

Since then Biden and liberals proved me wrong. I started watching his show again after trump won four months ago and basically learned why we lost, without the nonsense arguments and attacks from the left. 

here is Bill on the View, politely debating with some very liberal women, none of whom dispute what he has to say. A much more adult discussion than what is capable on amt when moderate views are shared. Quote him and prove him wrong with facts. See if this place is capable to politely debate.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tn1X-j09o1M

HughFreakingDillon

It wasn’t a compliment. 

HughFreakingDillon

Tim Simmons said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

I mean, at this point, I don’t even know what you’re advocating for other than just wanting to fight with a couple of posters here.

almost every comment I post gets trolled from someone overseas and someone else that thinks war is a joke (or that it’s my fault for wanting the countries to negotiate a treaty) and the “fight” is my fault. The personal attacks here are endless. Mentioning the rules gets mocked. But it’s me. Remember all the moderate Dems that used to comment here who rarely do anymore?

This forum has responded to trump by moving extremely to the far left, which is no way to reach purple and lean red states for senatorial and electoral votes. That’s the extend of my political passion. Almost all articles and ideas posted here are representative of far left views and often omit significant facts. Say anything contrary gets you a personal attack.

the “fake news “ posted on amt is astounding. Most posts here, if not all ,  regarding  (the original immigrant story) Khalils detainment claimed he broke no laws and he has the exact same rights keeping his visa as citizens. there is significant fallacy there and omission of facts in that view. Bringing that up here causes arguments and personal attacks.

I mean, this place doesn't move any needle. Yes, I do wish every post would be fair and include all relevant information for better discussion, but also, we don't get that in the broader world. I will say you approach the discussions here with better faith than other posters who are no longer with us pushing back on more progressive polocies.

Puh-leeze. Every time I countered his pro-genocide stance he would all-caps me “STOP SPREADING YOUR HATE ON AMT!! WHERE ARE THE MODS??”. 

Every time I explained what DEI realky is, he called me a fucking racist. 

Every single response in disagreement is somehow a personal attack. 

We’re all anti-semites. 

Better faith my ass. 

Tim Simmons

better than the ones who have been banned.

HughFreakingDillon

Tim Simmons said:

better than the ones who have been banned.

Not a good barometer. 

Lerxst1992

HughFreakingDillon said:

It wasn’t a compliment. 

And there it is. Shade and attack and trolling and zero interest in politely exchanging ideas.

I took the high road to their comment by treating it seriously and you go low. 

Again and again and again and again.

Think of the arrogance it takes to assume I didn’t understand the Maher comment directed towards me.

HughFreakingDillon

Lerxst1992 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

It wasn’t a compliment. 

And there it is. Shade and attack and trolling and zero interest in politely exchanging ideas.

I took the high road to their comment by treating it seriously and you go low. 

Again and again and again and again.

Think of the arrogance it takes to assume I didn’t understand the Maher comment directed towards me.

I take words at face value. Just trying to help a guy out.