Note to Readers
An appeal to subscribers
If you’re an immigration lawyer with a sudden influx of clients facing new or exotic problems, please write to taibbi@substack.com. Frustrated by inconsistent coverage, I’m hoping to take a trip to see how programs involving “extreme vetting” of immigrants are being implemented.
An example of how hard it’s become to comment intelligently on the subject involved this week’s viral case of Tufts student Rumeysa Ozturk. This morning’s New York Times story strongly implied Ozturk was arrested by masked plainclothes officers for writing a March 2024 op-ed in the Tufts Daily (an op-ed they didn’t link to, by the way). The sub-headline read:
The Trump administration said she “engaged in activities in support of Hamas.” Her friends and lawyers say all she did was co-author an essay critical of the war in Gaza.
The paper quoted Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who said, “We gave you a visa to come and study, and get a degree. Not to become a social activist that tears up our university campuses.” The Times did not mention Rubio specifically added she’d been detained “not just because you want to write op-eds,” but over vandalism and “that sort of activity.” Even the ACLU’s habeas motion on her behalf ignored the Rubio quote and said “her arrest and detention appear to be based solely on her co-authorship of an op-ed.” Lawyers asserted Rubio “confirmed” she was arrested “solely because of her actual or perceived First Amendment activity.”
None of this makes what the administration is doing right, but shows how difficult it is to work out what’s going on. Rubio implied vandalism, harrassment, and other offenses in the case of Ozturk (and as many as 300 other “lunatics” whose visas he said his office has revoked), but it’s unlikely we’re going to get specific allegations in most of these cases. The Department of Homeland Security did give a statement to The Guardian that said “DHS and ICE investigations found Ozturk engaged in activities in support of Hamas, a foreign terrorist organization that relishes the killing of Americans.” Still, what constitutes “activities in support of Hamas”?
Is it deportation over an op-ed, or throwing someone out for other reasons, under a Bush-era law that allows the state to do so without much due process? There are degrees to things, unfortunately not clarified by coverage. Also, what other types of immigration cases are popping up, and how different are they from previous eras? If you’re in the field, please advise. I’m likely headed to Louisiana soon, but I’m interested in any case that will help elucidate these issues.
Thank you for trying to find real answers rather than just stoking partisan flames.
None of this makes what the administration is doing wrong either. I have also been casting a wide net for legal and historical context and analysis.
One thing that should be really clear to anyone who believes in a sovereign state is that, as a guiding principle, guests to our country are not citizens - they are guests! Guests are here by invitation and can be asked to leave.