Marco Rubio’s visa efforts seek to curtail free speech
In a letter to Secretary of State Tony Blinken and a Senate resolution, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio is calling to cancel the visas of, and deport, any noncitizens who in his estimation have shown support for Hamas terrorism.
It’s a resolution and not a bill because a law already exists, making anyone who “endorses or espouses terrorist activity” inadmissible or deportable from the country. It is, for good reason, interpreted relatively narrowly, generally only applying to people who are or have been openly involved in designated terrorist organizations or specifically call for terrorist groups to carry out violence.
ADVERTISING
Rubio, of course, wouldn’t send a letter demanding that the federal government act on a law that he believed it was already in compliance with, which necessarily means that what he wants is for there to be much broader use of the provision. More simply, Rubio wants visa holders — students and teachers, doctors, executives, farmworkers, people of all stripes — to be evaluated for suspected terrorist sympathies and cracked down on if they’re deemed to have any.
The senator is very helpful in explaining he wants this done for every single one of the millions of visa holders here, writing that the law presents “a clear directive to institute a thorough review of all visa holders and applicants. This should include coordination with law enforcement, both federal and state/local, as well as universities.” He does not, however, include any specificity about what he views as sufficiently “endorsing or espousing” Hamas to trigger these provisions. His direct reference to universities gives us a strong clue.
Students and faculty at colleges and universities around the country have clashed over the conflict, with some making statements or signing letters that have, among other things, placed the blame for the Hamas attacks directly on Israel. Stupid as that position might be, it is protected speech taking place on higher education campuses, long the loci of political debate and envelope-pushing. Efforts by donors to have universities condemn or punish students who’ve criticized Israel, or have these students blackballed from employment, are a matter of choice; dangling the specter of a visa cancellation is another level.
Is, for example, saying that Israel triggered the attack via its Gaza policy not just boneheaded but actively “endorsing” Hamas terrorism? You could make the argument, and what Rubio is really trying to do is keep that question open so international students and visa-holding faculty will just say nothing rather than risk the potentially very steep consequences of immigration scrutiny. The irony shouldn’t be lost on anyone that just months ago he sponsored a bill to ostensibly “protect free speech on college campuses.”
We’ll remind Rubio of one little wrinkle: the Constitution, whose First Amendment guarantees a right to expression for everyone on U.S. soil. While we don’t want to have stringent purity tests for entry, evaluating visa applications from abroad should carry more discretion; stateside, though, it’s a very dangerous path to go down to start chilling speech with the threat of government enforcement, no matter how much we might detest that speech.
Either Rubio should clarify exactly what he means, and under which circumstances people should be targeted for their speech, or he should be the one to shut up about it.
—New York Daily News Editorial Board
