Is Trump's order to deport university students involved in pro-Palestinian protests on college campuses an attack on free speech and the humanity of Palestinians?
For context, this is a question I answered on Quora
Trump made it very clear in January that the content of speech (what the protest are about) is the target of his police action against Pro-Palestinian protests. Since it is still illegal to arrest U.S. citizens for political dissent on foreign policy matters he is testing the boundaries by taking civil action (which is what deportation is) against resident aliens who have a lower legal status here.
In a January 30th “Fact sheet” the Trump admin explicitly threatens to deport any resident alien who joins in protests against Israel which he deems “pro-jihadist protests.” No mention of criminal conduct as pretext for deportation is made.
Deport Hamas Sympathizers and Revoke Student Visas: “To all the resident aliens who joined in the pro-jihadist protests, we put you on notice: come 2025, we will find you, and we will deport you. I will also quickly cancel the student visas of all Hamas sympathizers on college campuses, which have been infested with radicalism like never before.”
Notice there is no mention of harassing Jewish students, encampments (trespassing), blocking buildings or vandalism i.e. the usual pretext. Resident aliens who simply show up to a “pro-jihadist” protest, carrying signs, or participating in chants, both of which are legal, is suggested to be enough to warrant deportation. This is very clearly thought policing.
As I noted in my previous answer back in January to the question of whether foreign students should be deported for appearing to support Hamas, an executive order Trump issued on day one made even the accusation of resident aliens “bearing hostile attitudes towards U.S. citizens, government, institutions, or founding principles” grounds for visa revocations and deportations. News flash: expressing “hostile attitudes towards U.S. citizens, U.S. government or U.S. institutions is the most American thing to ever do and is clearly protected by the first amendment. Verbal support for terrorism as in simply expressing favorable opinions about designated terrorist organizations such as Hamas or the IRA is also protected by the first amendment which is applicable to everyone under U.S. jurisdiction not just U.S. citizens.
Bridges v. Wixon and Bridges v. California has already made it clear that aliens under U.S. Jurisdiction have first amendment rights. As Justice Francis Murphy mentions in his concurrence:
The Bill of Rights is a futile authority for the alien seeking admission for the first time to these shores. But, once an alien lawfully enters and resides in this country, he becomes invested with the rights guaranteed by the Constitution to all people within our borders. Such rights include those protected by the First and the Fifth Amendments and by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. None of these provisions acknowledges any distinction between citizens and resident aliens. They extend their inalienable privileges to all "persons," and guard against any encroachment on those rights by federal or state authority.
The Bridges ruling also established that deporting aliens for guilt by association is unlawful which would include reasons as ambiguous as “hostile attitudes” towards American institutions. Being critical of Israel’s actions and policies does not make one a Hamas supporter anymore than being critical of capitalism and supporting labor unions makes one a communist.
In Yates vs. United States (I957) and Brandenburg vs. Ohio (1969) SCOTUS completely abandoned the clear and present danger test (i.e. shouting fire in a movie theater) used to limit free speech, so even verbal support for terrorism, so long as it does not cross into imminent lawless action, the standard for speech restriction, is legal under the first amendment. Pro-Palestinian protesters who wave the Hamas and Hezbollah flags are perfectly within their rights to do so.