As a former green card holder who is now a citizen, yes, you have slightly lesser free-speech rights. The government (quite reasonably) can deport you if your speech is a threat to national security or "materially supports terrorism." And they can deport you in a moment if you are convicted of a crime (details
As a former green card holder who is now a citizen, yes, you have slightly lesser free-speech rights. The government (quite reasonably) can deport you if your speech is a threat to national security or "materially supports terrorism." And they can deport you in a moment if you are convicted of a crime (details
vary by state.) Khalil didn't do either, but they're leveling these accusations so they can kick him out. (For background, I have spent many years in the Middle East, had a team in Israel, visited the West Bank, have friends in the Arab world who've given a lot to fight for democracy, and many Jewish friends in MA who hate Israel, too. So, I am sympathetic to his campaign, and I hate that Israel consistently equates being anti-Israeli-government with anti-Semitism, which is utterly false, and that so many Americans buy it. But that's a different issue.)
As I've said elsewhere in the comments, the facts thus far as to what exactly is the basis for the government's case against Khalil are unclear. It seems to involve the dissemination of pro-Hamas and pro-Hezbollah flyers during the Barnard sit-in/protests last week. Without a more developed record, I'll have to wait and see. If the gov't is able to tie him directly to such flyers, they may have a stronger case than I originally thought, given Hamas's designation as a terrorist organization and the fact that he is a green card holder, not a US citizen.
As a former green card holder who is now a citizen, yes, you have slightly lesser free-speech rights. The government (quite reasonably) can deport you if your speech is a threat to national security or "materially supports terrorism." And they can deport you in a moment if you are convicted of a crime (details
vary by state.) Khalil didn't do either, but they're leveling these accusations so they can kick him out. (For background, I have spent many years in the Middle East, had a team in Israel, visited the West Bank, have friends in the Arab world who've given a lot to fight for democracy, and many Jewish friends in MA who hate Israel, too. So, I am sympathetic to his campaign, and I hate that Israel consistently equates being anti-Israeli-government with anti-Semitism, which is utterly false, and that so many Americans buy it. But that's a different issue.)
As I've said elsewhere in the comments, the facts thus far as to what exactly is the basis for the government's case against Khalil are unclear. It seems to involve the dissemination of pro-Hamas and pro-Hezbollah flyers during the Barnard sit-in/protests last week. Without a more developed record, I'll have to wait and see. If the gov't is able to tie him directly to such flyers, they may have a stronger case than I originally thought, given Hamas's designation as a terrorist organization and the fact that he is a green card holder, not a US citizen.