290
US to revoke passports of parents with child support debt (www.bbc.com)
submitted 3 months ago by to c/news@lemmy.world
71 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [M] 5 points 3 months ago (1 child)

This comment was reported for "Racism"

I have removed this comment, but not for that, as "Trustafarian" isn't a race - it's slang for "trust fund kids that live a hedonistic lifestyle".

I removed it for misinformation.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Sorry, but just so I understand - what exactly was the "misinformation"? I'm not clear on what was either objectionable or incorrectly claimed to be untrue.

    For anyone salty about the fact that a government owns your passports, I don't have time to dig out a hundred statutes, but can you can refer to

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/22/51.7 and

    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/passports-introducing-her-majestys-passport-office

    For the US and UK.

    Also, "Trustafarian" isn't a race, it's slang for rich kids that pretend to be poor and live a hedonistic lifestyle.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago

    Sure, an administration that follows the law might agree with this interpretation.

    My point is that the government has authority to act and individuals have to sue to fight it. I'm not saying that revoking a visa over unpaid child support is a correct interpretation, or even "right" in a subjective moral sense. I'm saying it's within the NSPM-7 definition of what they can do to act first and let objectively shitbag people sue them to undo it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent