> How do you know she wasn't being arrested for one here?
Perhaps we could have some sort of public trial where some of her peers -- let's say a dozen -- could hear the facts and decide on whether she's committed a crime.
(Read the 5 paragraphs that begin with "He allegedly did not disclose".)
Everyone was up in arms about this guy a few days ago based on "how things looked"; turns out he was willfully hiding multiple affiliations that would have raised red flags against his visa. Which, of course, now raised a giant red flag against it. There is no government on the planet that would have been OK with misrepresenting yourself as a visa applicant (this is also known as "lying"). But because the US did, and because the news is so hyper-polarized, tHe gEsTaPo iS cOmInG yOu gUyS!1!!!!1! /eye-roll
Now you might disagree with me on whether these affiliations had merit with regards to invalidating a visa, but lying or withholding information to give your visa a better chance to pass is something that you must surely understand might be a problem.
There is so far no reason to assume that the woman arrested didn't make similar mistakes. That's all I'm saying.
I can't tell if you're deliberately missing the point, or don't know what due process is, but whether or not he had questionable affiliations isn't even the central concern. The suspension of due process is. Any person on our soil is entitled to due process BEFORE getting black bagged and disappeared/deported. Heard of innocent til proven guilty?
from your own source
>However, the government will have to prove to the immigration judge that Khalil willfully failed to disclose that information, and whether that disclosure would have impacted his eligibility for permanent residency.
There is a reason we have a court system, and to sort out these issues BEFORE we take violent action against people here legally is entirely the point.
The fascists are using a law from hundreds of years ago that's only been invoked thrice, all while at war, and the last time to wrongfully put the japanese in internment camps, to circumvent due process - that is the forrest you seem to be willingly missing for the trees.
This is just terrible, ridiculous hyperbole. Disagree with his methods if you wish (and I do, myself), but an orange Pinochet, Trump is absolutely not. Your framing is incredibly one-sided... "the fascists" (you're gonna have to define that word every time you use it since it's literally the most useless word in any rational discussion), "hundreds of years ago" (um, nope? See below), "last used to put japanese in internment camps" (Nope, that's simply your media's false representation of the facts, again- see below)
The legal standard for material misrepresentation is "Would a reasonable immigration officer have acted differently if the information had been disclosed?"
Given that the 3+ organizations he failed to disclose, almost definitely WOULD have caused an officer to act differently were they disclosed as was appropriate, the misrepresentation is thus material. (Arguably. Perhaps not definitively.)
So the bar of proving willful failure is lower on this one, and the courts usually then infer from circumstantial evidence: 1) Was the form crystal clear in what needed to be disclosed? (Presumably, it is.) 2) Were the omissions selective and beneficial to the applicant? (Looks like it.) 3) Was there a repeated pattern across multiple institutions and roles, all tied to politically sensitive affiliations? (The DOJ alleges this.)
In short, the DOJ has a valid case, and your claim of "suspension of due process" is simply false. If due process were suspended, you’d expect to see: 1) No hearing, 2) Secret evidence, 3) No legal representation, 4) Expedited removal without judicial review. None of that is happening. He’s going before an immigration judge, has access to counsel, and can appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) and federal circuit courts if necessary. That's literally what is making the news.
Here are the relevant statutes:
INA § 212(a)(6)(C)(i) – [8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(C)(i)]
"Any alien who, by fraud or willfully misrepresenting a material fact, seeks to procure (or has sought to procure or has procured) a visa, other documentation, or admission into the United States or other benefit provided under this chapter is inadmissible."
INA § 237(a)(1)(A) – [8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(A)]
"Any alien who at the time of entry or adjustment of status was within one or more of the classes of aliens inadmissible by the law existing at such time is deportable."
Relevant case law:
Matter of S- and B-C-, 9 I&N Dec. 436 (BIA 1960; A.G. 1961) - Clarified that even omissions can be material if they had the potential to affect the outcome of the immigration process.
Hassan v. Holder, 604 F.3d 915 (6th Cir. 2010) - The court upheld removal where the applicant failed to disclose his membership in a student organization that had links to a banned group, despite his argument that the omission was minor or irrelevant.
Ajdin v. Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services, 437 F.3d 261 (2d Cir. 2006) - The Second Circuit held that willful omission of material facts—even without direct intent to deceive—is enough if the applicant understood the question and failed to respond accurately.
Kechkar v. Gonzales, 500 F.3d 1080 (10th Cir. 2007) - Found that even omissions not obviously harmful to national security can be deemed material if they relate to affiliations or associations that could affect admissibility.
Other considerations:
UNRWA is not a designated terrorist organization, but allegations that parts of its workforce have been sympathetic to Hamas or antisemitism (especially after October 7) may be enough for DHS to claim that disclosing such a link would’ve raised red flags in background checks.
CUAD? That one’s iffier—political expression is generally protected, but immigration law isn’t shy about excluding individuals affiliated with subversive groups or with a “propensity” for inciting unrest. If the gov can tie CUAD directly to Hamas sympathies or disruptions, it gets dicey.
I wonder why you didn't quote the text here lol. Did you think we wouldn't click through and read it ourselves?
Listen man, whatever causes you to so willingly believe everything that known grifters and con artists are selling you is the same issue that has you convinced that everyone in your life is part of a vast and deep conspiracy to make you look stupid. You view everyone as being incapable of comprehending, in awe of your problem solving skills and media literacy, and well, you're right for very wrong reasons.
> whatever causes you to so willingly believe everything that known grifters and con artists are selling you
I literally question everything and base my opinion on facts. I think for example that regardless of basis, the optics on this one are bad. What do you do? Refer to whatever Daily Kos and Occupy Democrats says is the truest depiction of facts? LOL
> You view everyone as being incapable of comprehending
You literally are saying this in a conversation where I've tried to use evidence-based reasoning, citing what I can, and you literally lead with ad hominem, ridiculous hyperbole and slander. That's fucking rich. You must constantly confuse "looks like the authorities might be right on this one" with "bootlicking". Which is just intellectually lazy. Sorry I pissed facts into your "fascist" Cheerios.
1) the "West" is constantly at war with Islamists and their discontents in fights almost exclusively begun by them (I believe they are religion-motivated, based on my research, but that's another debate)
2) we have students on visas in the US who are supporting a widely acknowledged foreign terrorist organization, which goes against the letter of the law (which applies more to green-card holders than citizens)
3) people are assuming the worst about things they literally do not know about here
4) I am simply calling this out and getting downvoted as a result
Because the agency that arrested her told us why she was arrested, and it was "supporting terrorism" ie writing an oped opposing israel's genocide, when they certainly have no hesitation to mention the crimes when they are there??
Oh and the agency already has a well documented history of arresting innocent people? Look up "ice collateral arrests" "autism awareness deportation" or "soccer coach deported for real madrid inspired tattoo" or "tourist arrested" or "tourist held at border" to get a litany of examples. I'm sorry I pay closer attention to the erasure of our civil liberties than you do.
Of course I'm not judging the situation based solely on the video. I actually read about the case, but when I searched for the video that was just the first link.
I (clearly falsely) expected six plainclothes feds tossing a PhD student in to the back of an unmarked van would resonate more with the crowd here... I figured if you cared you'd look more in to it, rather than rush to defend the regime... Silly me, I guess.
Don’t bother trying to convince him. He’s relishing in the brutality against people he hates. He might try to intellectualize it (in the spirit of HN), but it’s coming from a place of pure emotion. Namely, anger, bitterness, resentment, insecurity, fear, and hatred.
Absolutely ridiculous slander. I challenge you to find good evidence against any assertion I make, because I only state things after I have researched them (and not only that, I ask an LLM to counterargue me). I don't hate anyone, I despise ideologies (one of which you are possibly unwittingly representing, without even realizing it, perhaps), groupthink, and baseless assertions or beliefs.
And most certainly, baseless accusations like this. There's no such thing as "rationalized emotion" (which you seem to be insinuating with your "He might try to intellectualize it" remark); criticism is either baseless/purely-belief-based/non-factual, or it is at least based on good-faith facts and reason.
That emotion you detect? That has to do with the amount of misinformation and truth-twisting going on out there... And it's growing.
Everyone was up in arms about this guy a few days ago; turns out he was intentionally hiding multiple red-flag affiliations; how would any government, much less the US, tolerate that?
>However, the government will have to prove to the immigration judge that Khalil willfully failed to disclose that information, and whether that disclosure would have impacted his eligibility for permanent residency.
>Baher Azmy, an attorney for Khalil, told NBC News: "These late-breaking, after-the-fact allegations, silly as they are, primarily show that the government must know the supposed 'foreign policy' grounds for Mahmoud’s removal are absurd and unconstitutional."
>Azmy said the government's new claims "cannot change the obvious fact the government has admitted — he is being punished in the most autocratic way for his constitutionally protected speech."
>the government has admitted — he is being punished in the most autocratic way for his constitutionally protected speech.
Gee, almost like we should have a legal system that sorts this stuff out before we take violent action against people here legally.
Agreed, but I still see value in wasting my working hours making sure people here at least see the reality.
All I have to offer this forum while I'm a student is politics, which I do know better than at least some here. There is no technology I can really offer a valuable opinion on, more than the experts here.
It's my armchair activism to at least make sure that the left's point of view is not wholly absent on this forum of affluent, insulated tech bros. Plus, my job has a lot of down time, so there are worse ways I could spend it.
It would be better if your goal was not to make "the left's point of view" more well-known (which is just pushing an ideology), but to call out unsubstantiated rightwing BS using evidence and reason.
Left wing positions, while they control no branches of the government and have no power is literally to raise alarms about what the fascists are doing, and how silly their propagandized reasoning is. That is exactly what I'm doing.
pushing ideology of anti fascists == calling out right wing bs using evidence (climate change, vaccine science, hell, any scientific research at this point all tick both of your boxes)
My last comment had about six sources, but I could find dozens more if you still find yourself blind and tasting fascist boot.
you don't even realize yet that you can't use "fascist" in a good faith argument without defining it precisely, because it's simply used as a cudgel word by both sides... and literally has been for almost 100 years
Is straight from the horse's mouth enough for you? I could go on and on and on if you wanna keep getting owned by receipts.
>I'm sorry you see...next time
You're the one who can't even find sources I found in 30 sec, but I'm the one who needs a critical thinking cap? You're a joke and you would've supported the nazis because "cmon, it's just a few cherry picked millions who got caught up in that!" Perhaps your desire to lick the boot outweighs your critical thinking skills. If you knew anything about how fascist regimes work you'd know this is simply stage one, not some anomalous happenstance.
Uhhh because 1) she hasn't been charged and 2) Marco Rubio has, on multiple occasions, said that it's because "no country in the world would keep a social activist that comes in and tears up our university campuses."
Another case is Badar Khan Suni who is here on a valid student visa, and DHS said they targeted for “actively spreading Hamas propaganda and promoting antisemitism on social media.”
> Bahar Khan Suri (spelling corrected; assuming this is him)
https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/21/us/bahar-khan-suri-deportatio...
"While the filing does not mention Saleh’s father by name, The New York Times reported that Ahmed Yousef – a former adviser to Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh – confirmed in a voice message that he was Suri’s father-in-law."
It's certainly sus, but I'd agree that if he was actually trying to work for peace, as he claims, and that this was demonstrable, this was pretty unjust at first glance
