220
United States: French researcher turned back for expressing “personal opinion on Trump administration’s policy (www.lemonde.fr)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/privacy@lemmy.ml
27 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

"The space researcher was allegedly randomly checked on arrival, during which his professional computer and personal telephone were allegedly searched. Similarly, messages about the Trump administration’s treatment of scientists have been found."

all 28 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 80 points 2 years ago* (15 children)

1st Amendment protections on freedom of speech apply to everyone in the USA, regardless of citizenship. Frenchman should sue.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 15 child comments
    •
  • [–] 27 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    That doesn’t de jure apply to non-citizens at the border, never mind de facto.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Rights don't apply to non-citizens? You sure?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    Relevant section on Wikipedia:

    The government may not criminally punish immigrants based on speech that would be protected if said by a citizen.[83] On entry across borders, the government may bar non-citizens from the United States based on their speech, even if that speech would have been protected if said by a citizen.[84] Speech rules as to deportation, on the other hand, are unclear.[85] Lower courts are divided on the question, while the leading cases on the subject are from the Red Scare.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions

    Regarding the protections against illegal searches, I think all bets are off, even for US citizens.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago*

    Visitors to the US have been asked if they were members of the communist party since forever though?

    IDK if those who replied "yes" would be sent back, but I do remember reading about Chinese communist party members being denied entry to the US.

    I don't see much difference between this and that as far as the 1st amendment is concerned... aren't you idealizing the 1st amendment (and/or how seriously the US takes it)?

    PS: let me make clear that I'm not trying to defend the indefensible behaviour of the Trump administration in any way

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago* (6 children)

    There’s no first or fourth amendment rights within 100 miles of the border of the USA. Probably other missing rights too.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    That's not true, because the Constitution applies to the whole place. Americans and non-citizens freely exercise those rights in those areas daily.

    If any agent of the government tells you otherwise, you must educate them and enforce the free exercise of your own rights.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception

    Federal law allows certain federal agents to conduct search and seizures within 100 miles (160 km) of the border into the interior of the United States.[5] The Supreme Court has clearly and repeatedly confirmed that the border search exception applies within 100 miles (160 km) of the border of the United States

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    This practice exists, but is in violation of guaranteed constitutional rights. The rights still exist and must be respected. The United States' failure to do so does not absolve the responsibility, nor does it negate the reality of the rights in question. The laws and practices enabling this situation are unconstitutional and thus illegitimate.

    As for what can be done about it, the responsibility of the average person is to be LOUD about it. Make them pay attention and do not shut up until they do.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    If any agent of the government tells you otherwise, you must educate them and enforce the free exercise of your own rights.

    How exactly does one enforce the free exercise of their rights?

    Remember that agents of the government are often armed and generally don't like being told what to do.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I was under the understanding that when in customs TSA overrides an American Citizens constitutional rights...

    Basically, you don't have a 1st ammendment right as an American Citizen.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • [–] 53 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Clown country thought police.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 42 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago

    You must have an outdated version. The current version is “We announce that there must be no criticism of the President, and that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong. Anything else is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 30 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Time to stay away from the USA.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
    • [–] 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    I heard from a Redditor that his tweets were luring US scientists to EU and his visit was a recruitment drive. One USAmerican already took up the offer.

    I imagine US does not want to identify him because although we could verify the above in his tweets, it would be advertising the lure for US scientists to defect.

    And the French guy probably does not want to identify himself because je wants to make the US government look as bad as possible.

    Not random, not as bad as the headline sounds but not worthy of banning anyhow.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    Are the checks really random? If not, what would trigger one?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •