Imagine this: A foreign student on an American campus leads a menacing protest praising a group the U.S. government has labeled a terrorist organization. Nearby, Jewish students report feeling unsafe and harassed. The university hesitates to act, worried about accusations of censorship or discrimination.

Should this student be protected under the First Amendment, or should his or her visa be revoked?

The recent arrests of Mahmoud Khalil and other foreign student activists in favor of Palestine have sparked the national debate surrounding college students’ First Amendment rights. Critics claim that foreign visitors enjoy the same free speech rights as American citizens. They further argue that deporting political activists sets a dangerous precedent, moving the United States down the slippery slope to autocracy. This debate has been focused on the extent of protections foreign nationals receive when engaging in political expression.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio says otherwise. He explained this issue to the press with a different framing: “If we knew this information about them before we gave them a visa, would we have allowed them in? And if the answer is no, then we revoke the visa.”

The Immigration and Nationality Act gives the president the authority to deport “any alien who endorses or espouses terrorist activity or persuades others to endorse or espouse terrorist activity.” This applies equally to both students here on academic visas and green card holders. It would be shocking if leading a protest movement that

© The Hill