23 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

She left the country to visit family. While there she attended a public funeral for a leader of Hezbollah, not Hamas. But again clearly details don't matter to you.  It's all about the feels right now.  Like I said, MAGA-esque and sad.

Oh Hezbollah. That makes it entirely different. Brilliant point. 

3 minutes ago, Gannan said:

Please point me to the part of the constitution that says we hav to let terror suspects into the country indefinitely. I've read it several times and missed that part. 

We’re not arguing that.

 

Mainly because they aren’t. 

2 minutes ago, Gannan said:

Oh Hezbollah. That makes it entirely different. Brilliant point. 

Again, ignoring due process and free speech is the issue here, not whether or not we agree with her positions.  Ignoring gross oversteps by the federal government because we don't like the person's politics is extremely short sighted and naive.

2 minutes ago, Gannan said:

Which rules are you referring to? I haven't found the rule or law that says you have to provide a trial or hearing for revoking a visa. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
 

Hope that clears it up.

1 minute ago, DEagle7 said:

Again, ignoring due process and free speech is the issue here, not whether or not we agree with her positions.  Ignoring gross oversteps by the federal government because we don't like the person's politics is extremely short sighted and naive.

We've talked about this over and over again. Revoking a visa is not a violation of free speech. 

Just now, Bill said:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
 

Hope that clears it up.

It doesn't. It says nothing about a visa for a foreigner. 

2 minutes ago, Gannan said:

It doesn't. It says nothing about a visa for a foreigner. 

It specifically mentions the situations you are arguing about. Word for word. 

4 minutes ago, Bill said:

It specifically mentions the situations you are arguing about. Word for word. 

No, it doesn't

I am not defending el salavdor prisons or detaining foreigners. I'm just talking about revoking their visas. They do not have to grant a trial and let a judge rule on revoking of visas. You're all wrong. And even if it did go to a judge, and the judge agreed with the Trump adminsitration, you'd all still be pinching your weiners. 

39 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

She left the country to visit family. While there she attended a public funeral for a leader of Hezbollah, not Hamas. But again clearly details don't matter to you.  It's all about the feels right now.  Like I said, MAGA-esque and sad.

So, you are saying she attended a public funeral for the leader of a terrorist organization.   In the eyes of many that constitutes association and would violate the terms of her visa leading to revocation.

18 minutes ago, Gannan said:

We've talked about this over and over again. Revoking a visa is not a violation of free speech. 

It is though.  Now you can argue that it's technically legal because of some arcane BS enacted by John Fing Adams whose meaning has been twisted by the Trump team, or by some Red scare McCarthy nonsense. But it's still trying to circumvent 1A and its extension to legal residents.

Regardless ignoring due process absolutely is not and should not be legal.  Nor should just grabbing people from the streets and driving them halfway across the country without any contact with a family and lawyers.  There has been a process in place for revoking visas and it involves contacting the person and bringing them to the consulate and arranging transport back home.  Not Fing mob abductions.

5 minutes ago, BBE said:

So, you are saying she attended a public funeral for the leader of a terrorist organization.   In the eyes of many that constitutes association and would violate the terms of her visa leading to revocation.

Could be.  We'll never know though because the feds at the airport ignored a court ordered stay and sent her home anyway while posting a big "DEPORTED!" message on their social media accounts.  That's the problem.

If you're asking me about my personal thoughts on her opinions on Iran and Hezbollah, I think she's an idiot.  

Just now, DEagle7 said:

It is though.  Now you can argue that it's technically legal because of some arcane BS enacted by John Fing Adams whose meaning has been trusted by the Trump team, or by some Red scare McCarthy nonsense. But it's still trying to circumvent 1A.  

Regardless ignoring due process absolutely is not and should not be legal.  Nor should just grabbing people from the streets and driving them halfway across the country without any contact with a family and lawyers.  There has been a process in place for revoking visas and it involves contacting the person and bringing them to the consulate and arranging transport back home.  Not Fing mob abductions.

Could be.  We'll never know though because the feds at the airport ignored a court ordered stay and sent her home anyway while posting a big "DEPORTED!" message on their social media accounts.  That's the problem.

If you're asking me about my personal thoughts on her opinions on Iran and Hezbollah, I think she's an idiot.  

The court ordered stay was for a very different case.  You are conflating two different cases.  She "associated" with terrorists which is grounds for denial of entry.  And having a visa does not guarantee entry when returning from abroad.  None of these standards changed with the ridiculous and wrong AEA implementation. 

 

And due process doesn't apply because visa issuance and revocation is an administrative act. 

9 minutes ago, BBE said:

The court ordered stay was for a very different case.  You are conflating two different cases.  She "associated" with terrorists which is grounds for denial of entry.  And having a visa does not guarantee entry when returning from abroad.  None of these standards changed with the ridiculous and wrong AEA implementation. 

 

And due process doesn't apply because visa issuance and revocation is an administrative act. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/16/us/brown-university-rasha-alawieh-professor-deported.html

There was a court order submitted and ignored prior to her being shipped back out.

39 minutes ago, Gannan said:

Please point me to the part of the constitution that says we hav to let terror suspects into the country indefinitely. I've read it several times and missed that part. 

There isn't any reason for anyone to keep discussing this one with you.  Bill is right.  You are just being obtuse or simply disingenuous.

 

26 minutes ago, Gannan said:

No, it doesn't

It does. It’s not my fault you don’t understand how law works. 

9 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/16/us/brown-university-rasha-alawieh-professor-deported.html

There was a court order submitted and ignored prior to her being shipped back out.

She was never admitted.   That is an important difference that the author does not clarify.  Any foreign national can be denied re-entry to the US.  This is more to this than in the article. 

3 minutes ago, BBE said:

She was never admitted.   That is an important difference that the author does not clarify.  Any foreign national can be denied re-entry to the US.  This is more to this than in the article. 

Re-entry comes with its own set of rules for sure.  Deportation, on the other hand, is something that is regulated and the govt can't just willy nilly deport someone even if their visa is revoked.

7 minutes ago, BBE said:

She was never admitted.   That is an important difference that the author does not clarify.  Any foreign national can be denied re-entry to the US.  This is more to this than in the article. 

That is fair, but wouldn't the standard procedure there to keep her at the airport until the case was clarified?  You can deny her admittance without sending her back no?

1 minute ago, DrPhilly said:

Re-entry comes with its own set of rules for sure.  Deportation, on the other hand, is something that is regulated and the govt can't just willy nilly deport someone even if their visa is revoked.

Can this be overlooked like when the government just willy nilly letting anyone come into this country for the last 4 years?

1 minute ago, DrPhilly said:

Re-entry comes with its own set of rules for sure.  Deportation, on the other hand, is something that is regulated and the govt can't just willy nilly deport someone even if their visa is revoked.

And she was denied entry and her visa revoked.  She was not deported.  If she had been admitted then it becomes a deportation. That is the key point of law here.  She was not deported nor was she expelled.

Just now, BBE said:

And she was denied entry and her visa revoked.  She was not deported.  If she had been admitted then it becomes a deportation. That is the key point of law here.  She was not deported nor was she expelled.

Yep, that makes sense.  I'm not dying on a hill for this lady.  In my mind, each case needs to be looked at separately.

1 minute ago, DEagle7 said:

That is fair, but wouldn't the standard procedure there to keep her at the airport until the case was clarified?  You can deny her admittance without sending her back no?

I would have to read more into the law to be able to answer that.  Tom Hanks did make a movie about that.

Just now, DrPhilly said:

Yep, that makes sense.  I'm not dying on a hill for this lady.  In my mind, each case needs to be looked at separately.

Every case like this will be magnified for the remainder of the term.

2 minutes ago, GreenReaper said:

Can this be overlooked like when the government just willy nilly letting anyone come into this country for the last 4 years?

Unfortunately for you, no.

1 minute ago, BBE said:

Every case like this will be magnified for the remainder of the term.

Given their behavior over the last two months it makes sense.  They have done everything they could to destroy any trust that the country (overall) has had in the WH.