3 ms·

I'm not a conservative. I'm absolutely in favor of free speech, modulo paid speech, as I listed above. Deportation does require some process, but you're not be

by noqc 1y ago

I'm not a conservative. I'm absolutely in favor of free speech, modulo paid speech, as I listed above. Deportation does require some process, but you're not being charged with a crime, you're being returned to freedom in your own country. If a democratically elected government demonstrates that you are not a citizen, and judges that the country would be better off without you in it, and further gained its mandate from the position that it would deport you, I'd be hard pressed to find a legal reason why this policy should be prevented. The first amendment protects you from prosecution, not deportation. We'll see if the supreme court agrees.

pjc50 1y ago
So .. where are the speech rules for visa holders written down? The important thing in rule of law is that it should be possible to comply. If visa holders were told that not engaging in political speech or holding certain views in public was a condition of their visa, then it's somewhat defensible. What are the speech laws that apply here? Or are you arguing that visas are pure whimsy? That they're awarded based on whether elected officials like you or not?
- noqc 1y ago
  You're not being imprisoned, executed, or fined. You're being sent home.
  - ben_w 1y ago
    Some of them very much are being imprisoned, and deportations are not all to the country of origin. Also, if the US government is doing deportations *for speech*, that's definitely 100% a free speech issue.
  - pjc50 1y ago
    Deportation is if nothing else a significant financial loss to people. And forcible deportation comes with a period of imprisonment. Let's not forget that people being sent to El Salvador who are not from there are not being deported, they're very definitely being imprisoned.
    - noqc 1y ago
      >forcible deportation comes with a period of imprisonment. You are at any point free to get on a plane home. >Let's not forget that people being sent to El Salvador Sure, but they aren't being rendered to El Salvador for their speech, which is what this particular conversation is about.
  - horsawlarway 1y ago
    > You're not being imprisoned, executed, or fined. You're being sent home. Why do you think this matters? Further, why do you think this isn't a punishment (often of greater impact than a fine? Nothing like paying for 3/4 of a top tier ivy diploma only to be sent home a few semesters before graduating - nifty little 100k fine right there...) These are clear punishments applied by the admin towards a group of people making specific speech they don't like. You are ok with that. Ipso facto - you are not pro free speech. I... don't really know why you're bothering to argue that you are.
xk_id 1y ago
Yet if a citizen of the country makes the same identical speech and has the same identical ideology, it’s now 100% acceptable and should carry no legal consequences? What is it about the specific combination of speech and citizenship, which suddenly creates a danger for society? What about speech which is done anonymously, is that more or less dangerous that the same speech made by a known citizen? Should all speech require proof of citizenship beforehand?

by noqc 1y ago

pjc50 1y ago

So .. where are the speech rules for visa holders written down? The important thing in rule of law is that it should be possible to comply. If visa holders were told that not engaging in political speech or holding certain views in public was a condition of their visa, then it's somewhat defensible. What are the speech laws that apply here? Or are you arguing that visas are pure whimsy? That they're awarded based on whether elected officials like you or not?

noqc 1y ago
You're not being imprisoned, executed, or fined. You're being sent home.
- ben_w 1y ago
  Some of them very much are being imprisoned, and deportations are not all to the country of origin. Also, if the US government is doing deportations *for speech*, that's definitely 100% a free speech issue.
- pjc50 1y ago
  Deportation is if nothing else a significant financial loss to people. And forcible deportation comes with a period of imprisonment. Let's not forget that people being sent to El Salvador who are not from there are not being deported, they're very definitely being imprisoned.
  - noqc 1y ago
    >forcible deportation comes with a period of imprisonment. You are at any point free to get on a plane home. >Let's not forget that people being sent to El Salvador Sure, but they aren't being rendered to El Salvador for their speech, which is what this particular conversation is about.
- horsawlarway 1y ago
  > You're not being imprisoned, executed, or fined. You're being sent home. Why do you think this matters? Further, why do you think this isn't a punishment (often of greater impact than a fine? Nothing like paying for 3/4 of a top tier ivy diploma only to be sent home a few semesters before graduating - nifty little 100k fine right there...) These are clear punishments applied by the admin towards a group of people making specific speech they don't like. You are ok with that. Ipso facto - you are not pro free speech. I... don't really know why you're bothering to argue that you are.

xk_id 1y ago

Yet if a citizen of the country makes the same identical speech and has the same identical ideology, it’s now 100% acceptable and should carry no legal consequences? What is it about the specific combination of speech and citizenship, which suddenly creates a danger for society? What about speech which is done anonymously, is that more or less dangerous that the same speech made by a known citizen? Should all speech require proof of citizenship beforehand?