Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Stephen Miller's pledge to deport those who "preach hate for America" has sparked fears of free speech violations.
Top Trump official Stephen Miller's recent declaration that anyone who "preaches hate for America" will face deportation has ignited alarm online, with critics warning the statement disregards First Amendment protections.
…
Social media users and legal analysts raised immediate concerns, pointing out that expressing dissent or criticism of the government is protected under the First Amendment. Some worried the administration was veering into authoritarian territory.
…
The backlash has reignited broader debates over the limits of free speech, especially as civil liberties fall under scrutiny. While immigration enforcement remains a core theme of President Donald Trump's platform, critics are increasingly questioning whether rhetoric like Miller's is a precursor to more aggressive suppression of dissent.
If America wants people to stop hating, maybe instead of trying to wipe it's ass with the first amendment, it should stop cultivating hate with it's actions.
After all the stuff Stephen Miller pulled during Trumps first term, I can't believe no one made sure he couldn't do it again. Apparently, I'm an idiot for thinking someone would hold him accountable.
I can hardly believe that we have devolved so far, so quickly. We are literally one step away from becoming an authoritarian dictatorship. The plan is this:
Deport (and by deport, they mean imprison for life) immigrants. These immigrants will mostly be legitimately illegal and gang associated criminals, but there will be a few individuals with legal standing and no criminal records. This could simply be the result of denying due process, or it could be an intentional test. The important factor is that 5th Amendment Due process rights are denied to all of them. The fact that these people (but be sure to de-humanize them as much as possible) are immigrants will be the distracting factor. <---- We are here
Deport (and by deport, they mean imprison for life) criminals. These will be legitimate criminals with legitimately horrible records; that will be the distracting issue that will be made the focus of the argument: "They are serial killers, rapists, pedophiles, we don't want them here, so we should get rid of them." This has already been announced as the plan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUfrwWz-m5I . That is not the point! The point is that they are still U.S. citizens, despite their crimes. The significance of this is that it will be the final barrier that needs to be broken, and the final protection that must be dismantled for the final solution to be enacted. If no one steps up and successfully defends the constitutional rights of these American citizens, then all the pieces will be in place for step 3.
Deport (and by deport, they mean imprison for life) political dissidents, rivals, business opponents, and maybe just anyone the administration doesn't like. If they are political dissidents they will claim that they have committed crimes like, "hate speech against America(TM)", if they are a minority, they will be "associated with gangs", if they are business rivals it will have committed "economic terrorism", or something like that. It doesn't really matter because they eliminated due process in step 1 (remember that was the important factor, not the immigrant dis-tractor), and without due process they don't have to prove any crimes. Our last defense would have been the simple fact that we are American Citizens, but we established that doesn't matter in step 2 because they were "bad people", but now the "bad people" are whoever the administration decides is bad.
The context of the 5th amendment is important to understand its intent:
Historically, the Fifth Amendment draws significant influence from English common law. The grand jury clause specifically dates back to the Magna Carta, and was designed to protect accused persons from prosecution by the English royalty. In keeping with that intention, the Constitution’s framers opted to adapt the grand jury to the Constitution, so as to protect citizens from prosecution by the federal government. Reagan Library
Even in a Monarchy, which is not the form of government we are supposed to have, the Magna Carta offered protections against the King from prosecuting commoners, which is the origin of this amendment. We aren't just devolving to pre-revolution America, which had enough disagreements with the rule of King George III that it sparked a war...no we are devolving to a pre-Magna Carta England type of Government. We are descending into middle-age feudalism with complete authoritarian rule.... and we aren't fortunate enough to have a dictator like Alfred the Great.
Skipping the first amendment would be making some speech illegal. With like a law and courts. They are also skipping the 5th, which would be due process.
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.
-Theodore Roosevelt
Hello...? ACLU? Journalists? Lawyers?Congresspeople? Senators? It's the 1st Amendment. The very first one! They should be suing this administration and blasting this out every single day. And we all should be calling our representatives every day, marching, and protesting. To start. Our democracy and country is being strangled, and the silence is deafening.
We need to ratchet this up, actually. Not just those who hate America. but those who have publicly declared in the last 12 years that America is anything less than great. Citizen or not, if we have record of you declaring America is not great, I want you gone. Start with the ones who said it loudest and to the biggest crowds.
Yup, America is officially a fascist state. They just admit they are full on Nazis now. Never in my lifetime I thought America will turn into that and here we are. It's fucking wild, like I'm living in some alternate timeline of Wolfenstein The New Colossus. Just wild.
critics are increasingly questioning whether rhetoric like Miller’s is a precursor to more aggressive suppression of dissent.
I dunno folks. we certainly don't have any other examples of Trump policies or behavior that might support this notion. I'm glad they are just "increasingly questioning" it.
Maybe when the concentration camps start showing up on US soil that will be enough.
The world would be a better place if Stephen Miller never said or wrote another word. He's more hateful of the Constitution than anyone in the country. He's a white supremacist bigot who is scared of his own shadow, and when cornered by his idiocy in an interview the only thing he knows how to do is fake outrage to dodge.
This is my country. I don't hate the country but the trash humans who have grifted their way into power. Just like a nasty shit they to will pass into the sewers.
So, where do we get have to go when they deport us? I'm Irish/Scottish from about 400 years back, so my ancestors were literally here before the USA existed. Do I get have to go back "home"? Because I've always wanted to go!