So clearly the 1st amendment's freedom of speech is dead.

[choie]

Mahmoud Khalil can be deported for participating in a pro-Palestinian protest. How the fuck is that legal? And at what point will judges rule that American citizens can be jailed for the same action? This country has fucking jumped the shark.

[Demovictory9]

1. Scary times

[lastlib]

2. like the rest of that "G-- D----- piece of paper".......

that all those "conservatives" professed to love---when they let their politicians wipe their fat asses with it.

[Wonder Why]

3. I'm turning you in for saying that. 😁

[H2O Man]

4. Recommended.

The administration is trying to destroy it, but it is not dead yet. There has long been disputes, people harmed, and court cases on Amendment 1 cases. It is up to us to fight for it. (Note: I just got back from buying materials to make posters with a dozen or so friends. Rallies, etc, are essential at this time.)

[PortTack]

7. Exactly! This will be appealed right up to SCOTUS. The ruling from a LA judge will not stand

[elocs]

12. Since courts cannot preemptively rule on cases & issues that have not come before them yet,

it seems like nothing to little is happening, that we are folding as a nation with a whimper and not a bang which encourages Trump and his maga cult.
But if SCOTUS folds in Trump's favor, that makes it hard to see light at the end of the tunnel.

[Shipwack]

5. Freedom of speech has always been optional.

It depends on who you are, your social status and skin color.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

6. 'Pawns': Critics blast 'fake' judge who ruled Trump can deport Columbia activist

The "judge" who issued this order is an immigration "judge" who was appointed by trump after trump purged all competent immigration judge. This judge is doing what he was ordered to do by trump and knows that if he rules against trump on this or any other issue, he will be removed.

This ruling will be appealed to a real judge who is not controlled by trump.
https://bsky.app/profile/realtuckfrumper.bsky.social/post/3lmkyc7orbj2c

Link to tweet

https://www.rawstory.com/mahmoud-khalil-2671753774/

A federal immigration judge’s ruling on Friday that allowed the Trump administration to move forward with the deportation of former Columbia University student Mahmoud Khalil was roundly criticized by legal observers stunned by the decision.

The ruling greenlighting the deportation of the 30-year-old legal U.S. resident came at the end of a hearing in Louisiana as Immigration Judge Jamee E. Comans concluded that the government “established by clear and convincing evidence that he is removable,” according to The Associated Press.

But not all were swayed by the judge’s legal reading of the case, which marked the first in a string of arrests at universities nationwide of students living in the U.S. as permanent residents in an escalation of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown......

“The fake judge (a DOJ Immigration Judge) ruled this, and he is only empowered to interpret immigration law, not the Constitution,” Cato Institute immigration expert David Bier wrote on X.

Civil rights attorney Scott Hechinger told his own X followers that it was “really critical to understand 2 things about the Mahmoud Khalil ruling.”

“1. Immigration judges are *not nominated & confirmed.* They are political appointees of the Executive. 2. Trump purged all immigration judges he didn’t like at the outset of his admin. They’re all pawns,” he said.

This ruling will be appealed

[spanone]

10. Straight out of the dictators handbook.

[wolfie001]

16. Thank you!

[MichMan]

8. Well, this isn't a good look

https://democraticunderground.com/100220230079

[W_HAMILTON]

11. Do you think he would be getting deported right now had Kamala won?

[WhiskeyGrinder]

13. Whether the "look" is "good" or not is...kinda the whole point.

[Iamscrewed]

9. Dead Constitution

The Constitution is done unless we fight for it.

[relayerbob]

14. The entire Constitution is moot

Unless and until the GQP is forcibly removed, it is of zero value

[LiberalArkie]

15. Just like the creators of the constitution, for the Male White Anglo Saxon Property owning Protestants

[sinkingfeeling]

17. Clearly.

[AZJonnie]

18. The 1A is not actually a 'law' as such

It's a restriction on laws that Congress (and later defined as applying to states as well) can make, subject to SCOTUS interpretation. Also, apparently non-citizens can 'legally' have their privileges to be here revoked at any time, for any reason. Well, if the POTUS declares some 'state of emergency' that's not subject to any review by any entity, then they can.