4 ms·
Since the administration specifically brought up "Department of State" as one of the entities that helped with the effort, my guess is the action is founded on
by tgma 2y ago
Since the administration specifically brought up "Department of State" as one of the entities that helped with the effort, my guess is the action is founded on this specific statue, not the "terrorist support" piece in particular, despite the latter being the widespread speculation:
8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(3)(C)(i) "An alien whose presence or activities in the United States the Secretary of State has reasonable ground to believe would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States is deportable"
This provision basically lets Secretary of State to deport any alien he deems in the future might post a threat to foreign policy. It does not appear to be a difficult standard to justify either and gives Secretary of State broad leeways in deportation of all aliens, including LPRs. That said, I am not sure it even technically constitutes "revocation" of green card. They seem to be able to simply deport you with a green card without needing the procedural burden of revocation.
All the other provisions outlined for cancelation seem to involve DHS (incl. USCIS) and Attorney General to cancels one's green card, and would not really be in purview of Dept. of State.
- Aeolun 2y agoIf that is that statute Trump is deporting him over, that’s both hilarious and extremely sad at the same time. I doubt there is any single person in US history that has been more damaging to foreign relations.
- tgma 2y ago> ...damaging to foreign relations The statue talks about Foreign Policy, not foreign relations. Foreign Policy is set by the executive branch, so almost by definition he cannot be against his own foreign policy. It could be a President's foreign policy to sever ties with some allies, for example, if it is in the benefit of the American people as he sees it.