Public opinion is sharply divided on the recent changes to US immigration policy. Proponents argue that enforcing a standard for 'anti-Americanism' is necessary for preserving American values, while critics express concerns about the infringement on free speech and potential civil rights violations. Some feel that the vagueness of the policy could lead to discrimination and government overreach, raising fears of a surveillance state. The discourse reflects a complex interplay of patriotism, fears of cultural change, and staunch defense of civil liberties.

US Government

Civil Rights Advocates

Criticizing Israel will now be considered “Anti-American”

lmao12367

Is this new? It has always been the case to reject those applications I assume.
But I don't like the amount of ambiguity in adjudication, either

no_ccp

Of course they’re going to keep it vague. Free speech for me but not for thee.

bubbabubba345

The new trend of giving officers very broad discretion while writing the policy with a “nudge-nudge wink-wink” undertone to deny the applications concerns me.

They did a similar thing with the naturalization process not too long ago. We are in the stage where via internal policy updates we are installing more and more hurdles, and the hurdles that need to be met are unclear.

What does anti-American mean? Besides specifying the antisemitism, they really don’t give much information on what that means. 

Does everyone now have to go do community service and go to church to meet this arbitrary standard? Why? Most Americans don’t meet the standards they place on immigrants who are otherwise eligible. 

And to think we have 3.5 more years of this. I truly think that if you survive this administration you can probably survive almost anything

Sac-Kings

So they’ve made this rule because they noticed a lot of people coming into the country who openly hate the country and talk about destroying it, no? So if you say you hate the country and want to destroy it (destroying liberal democracy) probably shouldn’t be allowed to come into the US it goes without saying. Any threat to a stable liberal democracy should be avoided.

Beginning_Army248

Criticizing Israel is definitely anti-American, isn’t it?

StephanieKaye

I would’ve thought that it’s pretty anti-American to weaponize government policy to silence criticism, but apparently the values that this country was supposedly founded on count for little.

dyorite

Be real here, they don’t care for anti terror ideologies, it’s more if you’re anti MAGA; then that considers you not eligible to gain an immigration benefit.

nukleus7

-Money-

[deleted]

I think a person's general attitude towards the country and overall compatibility with it's culture is what they mean.


We don't need Islamists chanting "Death to America" in Palestine protests. 


If you aren't coming here wanting to be AMERICAN, then don't fucking come here.


Sincerely, an immigrant. 

OutlawMINI

I think you are right to be concerned and asking questions about this. The lack of clear definitions makes it worrying because it could lead to unfair treatment of genuine political opinions or peaceful activism. And the truth is that nobody knows exactly how this will be applied in specific cases. Time will tell.  
  
Things like opposing a political leader or supporting peace efforts might be misread, which could unfairly hurt applicants. This risks discouraging free speech among immigrants who otherwise follow the rules.  
  
As for past immigration issues, while USCIS is right to consider compliance at the time, it shouldn’t be used to block people from legal paths to stay, like spouses of U.S. citizens who may have overstayed but now want to adjust status properly.  
  
The reality is that laws and policies can do one of two things: either create a very clear hard line rule, or something vague that is more flexible. A clear and fixed rule is easier to apply but does not take into consideration any nuances. Like going 5 miles per hour over the speed limit. The law does not consider if you had a good reason for it or not, it just says that it is not allowed. A more vague rule, on the other hand, is increases flexibility but then puts more power into the hands of some administrator or bureaucrat who needs to make a judgment call on a case-by-case basis. That is great if the person with this power is reasonable, but it can be terrible if they are not.  
  
We will see how this plays out, but don't lose hope. I am sure we will see court cases against this soon as well and there may still be changes.  
  
P.S. This answer is not individual legal advice and could change based on the details of your case. I can share general rules but this is not legal advice nor creates an attorney-client relationship. For advice tailored to your situation, please consult an attorney.

AttyLindpere

&gt; Is being against the recent strike in Iran or being in favor of a cease fire in Gaza anti-American or antisemitic? 

I'd say spreading Iranian propaganda is definitely anti-American.

LoneStarHome80

I have absolutely no idea how anyone can have an issue with this.   But of course, people will wet their pants over it.

BillyMac05

Some of us are considering living elsewhere. USA IS Becoming what's the word guys?   Unlivabel....untenable....unfair...unbelievable???     TELL ME.

Hefty_Target_2154

thelexuslawyer

This may also include organization that focus on sustainability and global warming, they have considered this before in their fight to deny global warming is real and erase science that backs up global warming.

dglgr2013

Would they also consider pro Americanism? Like I’d they see that an immigrant is EXTREMELY loyal and patriotic they could be more helpful to them? 

Not to the extent of giving out green cards to everyone who can recite the Pledge of Allegiance of course

AsukaLangleySoryuFan

Not being Anti-American to an extent is a tell tale sign that someone is not very bright.

Outrageous_fellow

I agree to an extent.  I think the biggest reason we've let things get this bad is that the vast majority of people are not picky when it comes to what they buy and consume.

I'm in my 40s, and I know maybe one or two people who take the time to research a product before buying.  Most people I know just want the new gadgets and only shop for price.

That has led to more and more companies taking shortcuts and cutting costs.

Now, it is difficult to find a brand that is trustworthy.  Everything is cheaply made and only lasts a few years.

Take Beats by Dre, for instance.  They were some of the worst headphones you could buy.  For the same price as those plastic pieces of crap, you could buy real audiophile headphones that don't make your ears bleed.  Yet, Beats By Dre became a billion dollar business preying on gullible consumers.

Until enough individuals decide enough is enough and refuse to blindly buy something to scratch an itch, corporations will continue to cheapen out on everything but the prices.

I mean, all those stories about working conditions being so terrible where they make iPhones and did that stop people from buying smartphones?  Not at all.  

We are satisfied by saying, "corporations are so evil," and then we go and buy it anyway.  

Until we learn some goddamn self-respect, things will just continue to get worse for everyone that isn't at the top.

1ndomitablespirit

Same in Europe and probably Australia, Canada, etc

gonuda

Two countries in particular have over one BILLION people and can supply a limitless number of immigrants. And they’ve been limited in the number of green cards yet H1B migration continues every year.

We can “solve” the problem by building housing? Sure, if you want urban sprawl and destruction of your rural areas.

Salty_Permit4437

10000% agree. Just last week microsoft and other tech companies announced layoffs while simultaneously increasing h1b hires.

every immigrant here is competing with you for jobs, housing, and college seats(the ivys are 30% foreigners now FYI).

you want affordable housing? you want to stick it to the boomers? kick out 50m immigrants.

octaw

This isn’t an opinion. It’s a fact.

Look at what California refugees did to Austin.
Look at Mexico City protests right now.

AeraSteele

Boomers basically sold out their children’s future for slightly more luxuries.

HiveMindKing

I see a lot of houses for sale that just kinda get left to rot because no one can afford them. An average mobile home in my area is upwards of $600k I don’t live in a particularly rich area either

ycey

I dont know that this is unpopular- I think many are recognizing that neoliberalism (what you are calling globalism) has been a huge failure. Particularly anyone under 45 or so is recognizing this.

I invite you to look up videos of Ross Perot and Bernie Sanders when they were considering passing NAFTA in the early 1990s. Many of these things were forseen decades ago. I wish your solutions could be implemented but at a time when giant corporations can lobby and due to the citizens united court decision stating that political donations are "speech", I just dont see it happening. What you are advocating are for workers rights - this is something the capital/donor class is entirely opposed to.

We are actively dismantling our public education systems and making college more and more expensive. And then the donor class makes a case for importing H1B workers, many of which enjoy free public school and free or very cheap university in their countries (India is the one I think of the most.)

clem_kruczynsk

&gt;When a corporation closes a factory in Ohio where they paid a worker $25/hour and opens one in a foreign country to pay someone $2/hour for the same work, they aren't being "efficient." They are profiting from that person's desperation. You know what other economic system was built on profiting from "labor arbitrage"? Slavery

They are always profiting from a person's desperation.

That is how capitalism works.

That is not how slavery works.

MinuetInUrsaMajor

BTW I got banned on the regular UO subreddit for this very post. Go figure.

SingleInSeattle87

How would this work for a company like Apple? They contract out manufacturing to Foxconn in China, India, etc 

Seems like a situation that tariffs could be designed for.

Tak-Hendrix

This is a popular opinion at this point. Might as well say no more H1bs

That_anonymous_guy18

If what I said resonates with you and you want to do something about it: join our politically active subreddit that I started: AmericanTechWorkers . No you don't have to be a tech worker to join. You just have to align with our political goals. We're trying to change the Immigration and Nationality Act to better favor Americans. Yes we are pro-american-worker and we're biased towards American workers over foreign guest workers. We don't hide that. What we are not is "anti-immigrant". Being critical of immigration policy is not the same thing as hating immigrants. Please don't conflate the two.




Vibe check: why are nobody's comments addressing the 1:1 mandate for h1bs to Americans and instead are only focusing on immigration itself?  It's weird how supporting the people already here gets you branded “anti-immigrant.” Since when did caring about domestic workers make you the villain? Feels a bit like the “pro-life” types who fight for the unborn but ghost the child after birth. Shouldn’t supporting all vulnerable workers, including the ones already here, be the progressive thing to do?

Does anyone remember shortly after the pandemic circa 2022 when salaries were exploding and you could jump from job to job to job demanding higher pay and benefits? I left a job where I was getting paid 80k for years(40 hrs + OT) and secured a similar job paying 130k salary(40 hrs) …instant 50k pay raise. Funny how it coincided with a time when borders were clamped shut and travel into the country restricted. Employers couldn’t have that though….they flooded the country the last 3 years to take back the balance of power.

Responsible_Pin2939

That's right folks, you know who made San Francisco and New York so expensive? Illegal Guatemalans.


They're just so damn wealthy from picking crops and cleaning hotel rooms, they show up and rent all the $3000/mo apartments!


OP definitely didn't base their theory on feels! All those million dollar town houses are owned by janitors! /S


I don't know how cons take themselves seriously...

didsomebodysaymyname

Partially agree



&gt;So here’s my other simple rule: The 1-for-1 Mandate. You're a company that wants to sponsor an H1B worker? Fine. For every single H1B visa you're granted, you are legally required to pay for the full college education or trade school certification for one American citizen to be trained for that exact same high-skill job.

This is the part that I agree with but the mechanism doesn't have to be so detailed. Simply, make the payroll tax paid by the company 300% of what it is for an American. This money can be pooled and used for retraining purposes. 

&gt;Any American company operating in a foreign country must pay its workers the U.S. median wage for that equivalent job. If the minimum wage here is $7.25/hour (which is already a joke), then that's the absolute global minimum an American company can pay any worker, anywhere. No exceptions. 

Sorry, this is ridiculous. The *easiest* objection is you said 'American company'. So Toyota can employ workers for $2/hour and then ship their card to the US. Even if you put a 100% tariff ( I hate, hate the idea of tariffs) it would be cheaper than any American company. There's a lot of other reasons why no government ever proposes this idea.

&gt;We have a catastrophic housing crisis. 

I don't think it's catastrophic if you compare globally but that's beside the point. The best way to reduce housing costs is to actually build housing. It's really that simple. Austin's doing it despite massive growth and lot of it from immigrants.  We can easily build enough housing for the 1 million legal immigrants the US brings in each year and a lot, lot more extra.

scylla

Maybe it was the endless market growth funding pensions. no?

cumjared

Unchecked immigration does have the impact of driving down wages in sectors where there is an oversupply of cheap foreign labor. More immigration also drives up competition for housing and services.

HistoryBuffLakeland

It changed the world (not just US) in many ways beyond things becoming more expensive. It’s a profound change in society.

mikeber55

To address a few of your points:

1. Raising minimum labour costs from $2 to $7.50 implies a 3.25-fold increase in labour-related manufacturing costs. Materials and logistics may remain stable, but a 325% labour increase must be absorbed somewhere. Are you comfortable with product prices nearly tripling to accommodate more domestic factory workers? Your job may not change, but consumer costs will rise substantially.

2. Do you prefer that educated Americans pursue high-skill, higher-paid roles, or would you rather market conditions push more of them into life-long manual labour? Is it desirable to reallocate talent away from professional/managerial/innovation sectors and into US factories?

3. With current US employment levels relatively good, what problem is being solved by these interventions? Why incur two new costs — labour scarcity and inflation — when there isn't really a problem at the moment?

4. Immigrants tend to live in denser households — more people in a smaller house. In contrast, older Americans often occupy large homes with unused rooms, once they have retired and their kids have moved out. Why then take measures against immigrants, instead of elderly Americans?

5. Immigrants often lack advanced qualifications, making them a good match for low-skilled roles. These jobs pay better in the US than in their countries of origin, so it's actually a better life from their perspective. If immigration is reduced, those same roles will instead fall to Americans — reducing higher education and increasing Americans trapped in low-wage labour. What do you see that justifies Americans being pushed towards de-skilling and lower wages?

6. If your full plan is realised — production shifts back to the US, immigrant labour is restricted, and Americans fill low-paying jobs — the result will be significant price inflation. When mobile phones cost $7000, the rich are pretty unaffected. But average Americans, especially those now placed in lower-income jobs, will bear the burden disproportionately. Are you aiming for a society with very high inequality between the rich and average person?

In essence, I think your goals are pretty decent — better wages, higher domestic skill, improved access to housing. But your methods ignore all the predictable real-world downstream effects. Perhaps you're content with widespread inflation, downward mobility and rising inequality. More likely, you’ve listened to too many right-wing YouTubers who don't explain the fundamental economics — and are mask-on racists/idiots

Mr_Valmonty

Sound like great ideas that will never happen but talking about them is a good start.

DrakenRising3000

I think the reason his opinion is unpopular is that it only captures a relatively small portion of the variation in the situation. In response to your proposed mechanism, one could ask whether you would oppose an American corporation building factories wherever labor is cheapest and most available within the United States? How about US territories, like Puerto Rico or Guam? Why is that situation different?

Actual economists have spent a lot of times studying this, and, again, there is only partial support for what you are suggesting. When labor is offshored, the cost of producing products goes down, and poor people in the US can actually afford things they would not otherwise be able to. Don’t believe me? Check out how much it cost to buy children’s toys and clothing 30 years ago versus now.

The real problem is stickiness: it used to be that an American family could survive off a single person doing manual labor. They could afford a home, a car, and many other conveniences. Now, that is nearly impossible, because the cost of labor(by this I mean its market value on a global scale) has gone way down. The answer to this is to try for some sort of retraining or re-structuring of the shift in the labor market. But the US seems unwilling to engage in this sort of process.

The irony is that artificial intelligence is starting to do this to white-collar jobs, and a lot of people who were used to relatively cushy lives are going to be facing the same global economic pressures as the working class has for a very long time. It’s unknown with the outcome of this will be, except it will be painful for a lot of people, unless US labor policy gets ahead of the problem. But it will bring prices down for a lot of goods and services for most of the rest of us who can manage to make a good living with whatever positions are available.

GrazziDad

I agree with you. Roger and Me with Michael Moore covered this.

SirCatsworthTheThird

I think it would be better to focus on building/reforming laws on housing instead of focusing on immigration. It only temporarily fix the problem, and be very costly. I agree with your stance on foreign guest workers, and i think they should be paid as much or even more than other workers, since it's even harder for them to leave their job and live a life in a foreign country.

Glittering-Glove-339

I’m sorry, but I am not going to vote for a solution that harms my fellow workers, no matter how much it benefits me.

KlutzyDesign

I came up with the same proposal regarding paying global workers the US minimum wage buy coupled it with : if a worker works more than 40 hours they must be paid overtime whether they salaried or not - a lot of “productivity” has been built on exploiting salaried workers by reducing headcount and making everyone else work longer hours.

fitandhealthyguy

Your analysis is off on the price of housing. The reason why housing is so expensive in America is because of corporate interference and zoning laws. 

When the only thing that is able to be build a single-family homes and every new building has to have 50 parking spaces it creates a flattening of the real estate market meaning though the man will go up but supply will remain low.

thundercoc101

The "hidden" story of US outsourcing, is that in the US, parasites literally re-wrote the entire field of economics around the turn of the century to hide their parasitism and even the phenomenon of parasitism.  

Other countries have dealt with their parasite problems more effectively, which naturally makes them more attractive to hire workers and invest capital.

For example, in the US, employers hate having to pay off the "health insurance" mafia, which makes hiring Americans a lot more expensive, contributes heavily to outsourcing to other countries, and the prices go up every year.  

But because the "health insurance" mafia has more money than God, they can always bribe and bully their way into maintaining and expanding the extortionate status quo.

The capitalist/kleptocratic media frames the problem as high "labor costs" making it more expensive to hire Americans, but a lot of it is actually higher "health insurance" mafia costs, and higher housing/rent costs.

xena_lawless

Hey everyone. THIS is why liberals say the right hates immigrants regardless of legality.

SuccessfulLock3590

globalism made things cheaper for people: it's why things are so cheap at places like Walmart. unchecked government spending has made things more expensive. the reason for inflation wasn't globalism, it was reckless spending by Biden

JackDostoevsky

Israel is living in the lap of luxury on your tax dollars. :)

Legacy-ZA

I agree that paying someone overseas $2/hour is exploitation.  I don't think that's a very controversial opinion.

I agree that H1B's are abused to get less expensive workers who'll have less mobility.  I don't think that's a very controversial opinion.

I disagree on the housing.  If it was simple supply and demand, they'd build more housing to meet the supply.  Why aren't they?  Follow that thread and you'll have your answer.  It's unlikely that it's "because too many of the customers are immigrants."

fingerofchicken

 Not immigrants. 

NAFTA and Citizens United are at the center of every problem in America.

Apprehensive_Cod_460

My opinions went back and forth on this post. In the end, i agree with the sentiment. The issue however, is that the politicians genuinely don't care and are only interested in money. While the idea of stabliity and prosperity for every citizen seems ideal, realistically Washington would never approve. No politican has these ideas set forth in america, theres some that SEEM to want these kinds of things, but realistically only want more money in their pocket in the end.

Alone-Connection-828

&gt;If the minimum wage here is $7.25/hour (which is already a joke), then that's the absolute global minimum an American company can pay any worker, anywhere. No exceptions.

Love the energy, but investors would kill America before they would allow this.

Pizzasaurus-Rex

And the H1Bs are pooling their money and buying homes as rental investments and Airbnbs. This should be illegal and I hope they pass the law to prevent this. It’s poaching resources from native born.

CommercialKangaroo16

LMAO, judging from the comments, this very very simple supply and demand-opinion IS truly unpopular with the average reddit midwit who thinks reality is racist/xenophobic and other words that end with -ist and -phobic

Jollarn

Ah yes all those hotel house keepers have just made everything so expensive. 

It’s not the unchecked profits from corporations or anything. It’s the poor immigrants who live down the street. 

I’m sure once we remove them all we can go back to living in the 1950s fantasy the right wing is obsessed with.

Jeb764

the cost of food is the big reason why guest workers are needed. i do believe we over played our hand with Chineese manufacturing along with NAFTA. but lets think about higher standards of living and what actually gets those jobs. high tech manufacturing from low tech refining and base production. the usa should be doing the hogh tech and importing the low tech. and i think that’s something the DoD already expressed. but then you got people pulling the rug on the chips act and the build back better and now everyone is blaming immigrants. 

ActOfGenerosity

This opinion seems to be two parts. 




First... The greed of corporate America, and their investors. Plus the selfishness of all other Americans who would rather buy cheap shit, then pay for your healthcare, bonuses, and vacations. Has caused a race to the bottom.


That Sounds right. But Americans have fought back with the "business clause" where no matter who, or what you are in life. As long as it's about money, it's business and as long as it's business. You can shit upon anything and anyone, that cost you money. Whether giving or taking it. 


Americans have Even found "The Business Clause"  in the Bible. So to make it good and christian 


Second is immigration and especially H1b visas have made everything more expensive. And that they are not needed. 


I don't know how or why farm workers and other labors without credit would effect the price of rent or mortgage. 


Why wouldn't the exploding large amount of investors who get first look at every house that sales for cash. Be one of the many,(bigger then immigrants) causes for higher prices and fewer choices. 


Then there's this need/not need thingy. You believe a company shouldn't employee the brightest and smartest. But should have a DEI program for "locals" another word for those with the means to afford a education. 


You also seem to blame corporate America for not educating Americans. With no thought in whose responsibility education is or Without considering the culture difference or desire of the American population vs Southern Asian countries. 


So basically Americans are greedy and lazy. And you think american companies should install a dei system for those that can afford college.

Cahokanut

I am 72 years old and I can tell you exactly when the working class started to get screwed. First we had the Vietnam war and LBJ tried to have both guns and butter with out raising taxes. This led to stagflation under Carter and Ronny Reagan came in and said the whole problem was high taxes and high union wages and the Republicans have been on that road ever since. It has lead us to this point and rather than the American workers going, Hey this ain't working lets do something else. They are standing up pointing fingers at people even poorer than them saying it's all those non white peoples fault.

Buford12

AskTrumpSupporters is a Q&amp;A subreddit dedicated to better understanding the views of Trump Supporters, and why they hold those views.

**For all participants:**

* [Flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_flair) is required to participate

* [Be excellent to each other](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/goodfaith2)
            
**For Nonsupporters/Undecided:**

* No top level comments

* All comments must seek to clarify the Trump supporter's position

**For Trump Supporters:**

* [Message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23AskTrumpSupporters&amp;subject=please+make+me+an+approved+submitter&amp;message=sent+from+the+sticky) to have the downvote timer disabled

Helpful links for more info:

[Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_rules) | [Rule Exceptions](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_exceptions_to_the_rules) | [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_posting_guidelines) | [Commenting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_commenting_guidelines)


*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskTrumpSupporters) if you have any questions or concerns.*

AutoModerator

No, that should happen prior to being naturalized

SteedOfTheDeid

Denaturalization is appropriate when someone lied in their previous applications and interactions with the government, which means they gained citizenship under false pretenses.

Scynexity

[This is Hamas](https://www.hamas-massacre.net/). Who they are and what they did should actually be universal viewing as part of a mandatory antisemitism seminar your first semester of college. I've never met a Palestinian simp that actually forced themselves to see what happened and maintained their support.

If you can actually watch through it and come out on the side of the Palestinians, your brain is actually broken. It's like watching uncensored PoV footage of auchwitz and maintaining your support for the Reich.

Naturalized or not you should not have been let into this country if you harbor that level of evil, it means the immigration screening failed.

It's also not "IDF propaganda", ironically it's Hamas Propaganda. A large percentage of the footage filmed that day was on bodycams take off the Hamas terrorists.

If you want a parallel that's not about Jews, the civilian collateral damage in Ukraine is tragic but it's qualitatively different from the Bucha massacre. Collateral damage from a missed rocket strike is not the same as Russian troops going door to door and murdering every civilian they could find. That kind of act is fundamentally different, and thank God that was a singular event.

By contrast that is not a singular event for the Palestinians, that IS their default setting. It is what they mean when they chant From the River to the Sea.  When Hamas fighters paraded the naked corpse of a Jewish woman they raped to death, dried blood literally trailing down her thighs, the crowd cheered wildly. That's not Israeli propaganda, the Palestinians filmed it themselves.

Andrew5329

I don't see a lot of issues with just monitoring as I already assume we all are being watched in some way.  Pretty much assume they are on the lookout for anyone crazy but what happens after that is the real issue.

Capable_Obligation96

All of us are monitored in some way for illegal or... questionable views. But to monitor some specific group just because they're naturalized citizens? No. Further when we accept someone as a citizen then they're ours, no refunds, no returns. Hence why strong immigration controls are important.

Owbutter

No, questions like this are amusing though. Most conservatives hold the utterly common sense position - illegal aliens should be deported. Intuitive, fair, just, coherent. Enter illegally, you need to leave. We don’t let people who get caught stealing cars keep the car. 

The left has grown so radicalized on the issue though — outright support and aid for MS-13, taxpayer-funded hotel stays and health benefits and cash, obstruction of and violence against law enforcement, etc. — that they confuse basic law enforcement with 1984. 

It’s profoundly sad, but it’s what happens when your political leadership lacks character and decency and sees its voters as marks.

DidiGreglorius

Naturalized citizens with anti-American views should get a psychological evaluation. Why would you become a citizen of a country you hate?

mrhymer

Nah.

Citizens have rights, non-citizens dont.

Democrats haven't been helpful as they have continually insisted on mudding the watters between those two groups but there is infact a destinction between naturalized citizens and non-citizens. Naturalized citizens are citizens and citizens do infact have a right to free speech in this country.

lt's in the first ammendment.

MattCrispMan117

Yes, they should be monitored. Anyone who supports e.g., Al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas - holds values inimical to the US. A country cannot survive if enough of its residents hold such views. Even if it's only a minority, those people are a heightened risk due to their views. 

To me, it's like asking whether we should monitor citizens who are avowed neo-Nazis. Of course, we should.

Some_Sprinkles4335

I think we'd need to have a very solid idea of what being an American means and we'd need a solid national unity around that identity before deporting people. 

Personally, I get rid of the left and many on the right whether they're citizens or not just based on how they treat the country. You can't become a citizen and then talk down on or compromise said country you moved to.

Quiet_Entrance_6994

100% they should and be deported for any anti-american expressions.

Trumpdrainstheswamp

I would put the threshold at, is it actually a crime or not. Would it be a crime if I did it. I don’t think I’m allowed to issue death threats or support terror or organized crime groups. I don’t think I’m allowed to interfere with a lawful order from a law enforcement officer. I think there are anti-stalking laws. Just to name a few examples.

Ok_Motor_3069

Hell no. Should they be vetted beforehand though? Of course.

awake283

"Monitored" is tricky. What does that mean, have an agent assigned to every naturalized citizen? That's goofy. If we modify the suggestion to "should we have and apply standards for prospective citizens?", then while that's reasonable in principle (are we obligated to let in people who hate our country?), it's a problem in practice because the only thing you could get American politicians to agree on is that criticizing Israel is bad. 

Setting aside the Zionist aspect and taking such a policy at face value: the real issue is still the underlying immigration policy. It's not like we have a sensible system that is tragically being subverted by terrorists or whatever. Our immigration system just plain sucks. We will radically transform it, or it will radically transform us. Those are the two options. There's no third option of "mass, diverse immigration but only of people that are pro-American". That isn't possible. It's a civic nationalist fantasy.

SincereDiscussion

Absolutely not. No citizen, naturalized or not, should be monitored by the government without a warrant or some similar mechanism

BananaRamaBam

Yes, but that shouldn’t mean deportation (ICE) or imprisonment (HUAC).

DavidSmith91007

The biggest example of this, and original Extrajudicial case happened under Obama with the killing of the American, anti-American Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, who was taken out in an airstrike in Yemen. That goes FAR beyond deportation. You might complain that this is about Trump, not Obama, but it matters as some precedent was set on the extent the US gov could go based upon anti-American speech, and that apparently included airstrikes overseas against Americans, and having other Americans in the car didnt stop the airstrike from happening... 

Its a case-by-case basis but it can go pretty damn far, and that was before Trump ever set foot in the White House as POTUS

NoVacancyHI

You’re comparing apples to oranges…..when non-citizen visa holders of any kind are issued they are informed that if they commit acts of terrorism or openly support said actions they will have their visas revoked and will be deported…..work visas, student visas, makes no difference…..they are guests in our country and their presence here should be considered a privilege and not a right…..

Lieuwe2019

I'm not in favor of a survalance state.  However, when one is out organizing / leading anti-american protests - one should be on a watch list - no mattery who you are.

sfendt

WorriedTumbleweed289

First, there are two classes of citizens. Those that were born citizens and those who became citizens (naturalized).

For those who were naturalized, the can be denaturalized for the following reasons:

* **Fraud or Misrepresentation:** If someone lied or concealed facts during the application process, like hiding a criminal background.
* **Criminal Acts:** Particularly if the crimes involve terrorism, war crimes, or treason.
* **Membership in Prohibited Organizations:** For example, if the person joins certain organizations that are hostile to the country after gaining citizenship.
* **Refusal to Follow Lawful Orders:** In exceptional cases where individuals refuse to uphold their responsibilities as citizens.

Born citizens are not subject to the same consequences.

whateverisgoodmoney

Nope. One of the foundations that makes the USA the best country on the planet is that all it's citizens and legal residents can say what they want, however idiotic.

p3ric0

ABSOLUTELY NOT!

Anti-American views are American views. It's literally the first amendment.

yoanon

Do I think they should be de-naturalized for having opinions? No. 

However, through the naturalization process, you do swear an oath of allegiance to the country and to release your bonds to foreign entities. You are also screened for any potential links to radical organizations. (Source: Me, who walked through the naturalization process for my wife). 

If you lied on your paperwork or took the oath under false pretenses... then you lied in order to gain a federally granted status. If you lied on a federal money grant paperwork, the federal government has the right to prosecute you AND take the grant money away. Why wouldn't they also have the right to take away naturalization if you lied to obtain it? 

Of course, it should not be done flippantly, and typical protections for all citizens (innocent until proven guilty) should apply. It shouldn't be an executive decision but a judicial one.


As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)

In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. 

If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.

 For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
 
 We are actively looking for new moderators.  If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
 

***


*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*

"Name all the branches of the Israeli government"

RGS_1994

So basically you have to be a conservative or reactionary to get a visa, green card or citizenship now . . . well that or insanely rich.

Oldschoolhype2

FahrenheitGhost

And people are wondering why tourist locations are ghost towns

armyofant

United States my ass. Rest of the world, shit is lined up for you to take it from here. We're going to become as irrelevant to the rest of the world as North Korea. 

MiddleHoliday2974

&gt; The policy changes follow others recently implemented since the start of the Trump administration including social media vetting and the most recent addition of assessing applicants seeking naturalization for **‘good moral character’**. That will not only consider “not simply the absence of misconduct” but also factor the applicant’s positive attributes and contributions.

zubbs99

Question 1: Is the UN’s International Criminal Court located in The Hague a “threat to US national security”?

Apparently, according to the Secretary of State, the answer is yes.

no_kids-and-3_money

Interesting that a more or less white supremacist party is positioning itself to the right of AIPAC in its opposition to anti-Semitism (as in un-patriotic in the U.S.)

fxkatt

Because they have been told that immigrants are what caused their problems.

NaturalCard

Are you kidding me? The cultural battle over immigration in the UK makes the US look like Mr. Rogers neighborhood.

MuchCity1750

Europe has the same issues. Poor folks migrating to seemingly better places. A lot of folks want things to be the way they used to be. Yes, some are criminals, but most are folks looking for a better life and willing to work for it...

Most_Researcher_9675

The USCIS has implemented new guidelines scrutinizing immigrants for expressions of anti-Americanism on social media in visa applications.

US Immigration Policy Changes and Anti-Americanism

Why This Matters

Public Sentiment Summary

Highlighted Comments

Parties Involved

What the people want