5 ms·

Technically incorrect, Supreme Court precedent has held that aliens are entitled to lesser First Amendment protections while seeking to enter the United States.

Technically incorrect, Supreme Court precedent has held that aliens are entitled to lesser First Amendment protections while seeking to enter the United States. You could be on US Soil (i.e. entering customs at an airport) and those protections don't apply. The person in question said he was in Geneva when he received the email from Google. Therefore is a non-US citizen residing outside the country entitled to 1A protections for something they said or did while in the US? I'm not expressing an opinion but I wouldn't take that statement as legal advice.

Jimmc414 6mo ago
Yes, someone in customs at an airport can be treated as functionally “at the border” with reduced protections. But you are conflating seeking entry with being present inside the country. That’s the legal line, and the Supreme Court has stated it clearly. “once an alien enters the country, the legal circumstance changes, for the Due Process Clause applies to all ‘persons’ within the United States, including aliens, whether their presence here is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent.” [0] As for the First Amendment specifically the Supreme court has reversed the deportation order of an Australian labor activist due to alleged Communist Party affiliation, concluding that “freedom of speech and of the press is accorded aliens residing in this country” [1] The Geneva detail doesn’t apply. He was on US soil as a lawful visa holder when he attended the protest. It’s a question of where he was when the government action targeted his protected expression not where he was when Google emailed him. His departure doesn’t retroactively strip the constitutional protections that applied when the conduct occurred. [0] https://law.onecle.com/ussc/533/533us693.html https://law.onecle.com/ussc/533/533us693.html [1] Bridges v. Wixon https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/aliens/ https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/aliens/
- logifail 6mo ago
  > Yes, someone in customs at an airport can be treated as functionally “at the border” with reduced protections. But you are conflating seeking entry with being present inside the country. That’s the legal line, and the Supreme Court has stated it clearly. At least in terms of being "at the border", United States v. Martinez-Fuerte would appear to disagree. That legal line you mention is both figuratively and literally not at the border; protections are weakened up to 100 miles away.
  - mortarion 6mo ago
    Most people in the USA live within 100 miles of the border. That 100 miles limit was chosen for a purpose, to weaken protections for most US citizens.
    - red-iron-pine 6mo ago
      the 100 mile limit was chosen because its ~2 hour drive at 60mph, assuming some stop lights and on-ramps. someone jumps the fence or is smuggled in via truck, etc., then CBP has maybe a couple hours to track them.
      - adjejmxbdjdn 6mo ago
        So glibly handing over your rights, and even going out of your way to defend it. It’s a little more annoying coming from the country that goes on and on about its freedom.
        red-iron-pine 6mo ago
        this is a bot
- zwaps 6mo ago
  If only the US would follow its laws or constitution
  - cnd78A 6mo ago
    If only the US would follow its laws or constitution It's not specific to US, those aren't enforced in most EU countries (eg. it's quite obvious in France).
pyrale 6mo ago
To condone what happens to him, you must first condone that your government lists and identifies people attending opponent meetings. Whether the government waits for him to leave the country to violate his rights feels like a small detail in this issue. Also, if you intend to claim that us foreigners are free targets for any abhorent behaviour of your government, maybe you should rename your bill of rights a bill of privileges.
- refurb 6mo ago
  Whoa! I’d slow down with the hypotheses, considering we have one side of the story. What we do know is that the US, like all other countries, has wide legal latitude on not allowing foreigners into the country. You can be denied entry for no more than a Facebook like of the wrong post.
  - pyrale 6mo ago
    The EFF letter tends to line up with this guy’s story, though. Also, since google complied without giving him the ability to challenge the request, we will never have another version. In that context, it feels fair to accept the only version we have. The events he was likely targeted for happened on a campus in the US.
  - Jimmc414 6mo ago
    The policy of applying US immigration enforcement actions against legal visa holders who have attended specific legal (US based) protests has been publicly reported and confirmed by many government officials and is unrelated to anyone trying to enter the country. Senior ICE officials have testified under oath in federal court that analysts were moved from counterterrorism, global trade, and cybercrime work to this group focused specifically on writing reports about people involved in student protests. https://www.cnn.com/2025/07/09/politics/ice-homeland-security-canary-mission https://www.cnn.com/2025/07/09/politics/ice-homeland-securit... https://time.com/7272060/international-students-targeted-trump-ice-detention-deport-campus-palestinian-activism/ https://time.com/7272060/international-students-targeted-tru... https://www.wbur.org/news/2025/07/10/ice-lawsuit-deportation-federal https://www.wbur.org/news/2025/07/10/ice-lawsuit-deportation...
nickburns 6mo ago
'Technically incorrect' on a matter of U.S. constitutionality, says the poster talking about capital-'s' soil. Right.

Jimmc414 6mo ago

Yes, someone in customs at an airport can be treated as functionally “at the border” with reduced protections. But you are conflating seeking entry with being present inside the country. That’s the legal line, and the Supreme Court has stated it clearly. “once an alien enters the country, the legal circumstance changes, for the Due Process Clause applies to all ‘persons’ within the United States, including aliens, whether their presence here is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent.” [0] As for the First Amendment specifically the Supreme court has reversed the deportation order of an Australian labor activist due to alleged Communist Party affiliation, concluding that “freedom of speech and of the press is accorded aliens residing in this country” [1] The Geneva detail doesn’t apply. He was on US soil as a lawful visa holder when he attended the protest. It’s a question of where he was when the government action targeted his protected expression not where he was when Google emailed him. His departure doesn’t retroactively strip the constitutional protections that applied when the conduct occurred. [0] https://law.onecle.com/ussc/533/533us693.html https://law.onecle.com/ussc/533/533us693.html [1] Bridges v. Wixon https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/aliens/ https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/aliens/

logifail 6mo ago
> Yes, someone in customs at an airport can be treated as functionally “at the border” with reduced protections. But you are conflating seeking entry with being present inside the country. That’s the legal line, and the Supreme Court has stated it clearly. At least in terms of being "at the border", United States v. Martinez-Fuerte would appear to disagree. That legal line you mention is both figuratively and literally not at the border; protections are weakened up to 100 miles away.
- mortarion 6mo ago
  Most people in the USA live within 100 miles of the border. That 100 miles limit was chosen for a purpose, to weaken protections for most US citizens.
  - red-iron-pine 6mo ago
    the 100 mile limit was chosen because its ~2 hour drive at 60mph, assuming some stop lights and on-ramps. someone jumps the fence or is smuggled in via truck, etc., then CBP has maybe a couple hours to track them.
    - adjejmxbdjdn 6mo ago
      So glibly handing over your rights, and even going out of your way to defend it. It’s a little more annoying coming from the country that goes on and on about its freedom.
      - red-iron-pine 6mo ago
        this is a bot
zwaps 6mo ago
If only the US would follow its laws or constitution
- cnd78A 6mo ago
  If only the US would follow its laws or constitution It's not specific to US, those aren't enforced in most EU countries (eg. it's quite obvious in France).

pyrale 6mo ago

To condone what happens to him, you must first condone that your government lists and identifies people attending opponent meetings. Whether the government waits for him to leave the country to violate his rights feels like a small detail in this issue. Also, if you intend to claim that us foreigners are free targets for any abhorent behaviour of your government, maybe you should rename your bill of rights a bill of privileges.

refurb 6mo ago
Whoa! I’d slow down with the hypotheses, considering we have one side of the story. What we do know is that the US, like all other countries, has wide legal latitude on not allowing foreigners into the country. You can be denied entry for no more than a Facebook like of the wrong post.
- pyrale 6mo ago
  The EFF letter tends to line up with this guy’s story, though. Also, since google complied without giving him the ability to challenge the request, we will never have another version. In that context, it feels fair to accept the only version we have. The events he was likely targeted for happened on a campus in the US.
- Jimmc414 6mo ago
  The policy of applying US immigration enforcement actions against legal visa holders who have attended specific legal (US based) protests has been publicly reported and confirmed by many government officials and is unrelated to anyone trying to enter the country. Senior ICE officials have testified under oath in federal court that analysts were moved from counterterrorism, global trade, and cybercrime work to this group focused specifically on writing reports about people involved in student protests. https://www.cnn.com/2025/07/09/politics/ice-homeland-security-canary-mission https://www.cnn.com/2025/07/09/politics/ice-homeland-securit... https://time.com/7272060/international-students-targeted-trump-ice-detention-deport-campus-palestinian-activism/ https://time.com/7272060/international-students-targeted-tru... https://www.wbur.org/news/2025/07/10/ice-lawsuit-deportation-federal https://www.wbur.org/news/2025/07/10/ice-lawsuit-deportation...

nickburns 6mo ago

'Technically incorrect' on a matter of U.S. constitutionality, says the poster talking about capital-'s' soil. Right.