About Mayday Movement USA

The administration has targeted immigrants, even those with lawful status, for deportation as punishment for political speech, an outrageous violation of free speech and equal protection. In early March, federal agents arrested Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian-American graduate student at Columbia University and a lawful permanent resident, days after he participated in campus protests against the Gaza occupation. The government then sought to deport Khalil, invoking an obscure Cold War-era provision (the McCarran-Walter Act of 1952) that allows removal of an alien whose activities may have “potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences” for the U.S. In essence, the State Department (led by Secretary Marco Rubio) argued that Khalil’s pro-Palestinian advocacy was hurting U.S. relations with Israel. An immigration judge in Louisiana, astonishingly, ruled that Khalil could be deported for his protest activities, accepting the government’s claim that his speech equated to supporting terrorism​. Khalil’s case, now on appeal, has become a bellwether for the First Amendment: never in modern times has the government tried to exile a green-card holder solely for political protest.

The President has loudly championed this approach. He posted on social media that “we will find, apprehend, and deport” students engaged in “pro-terrorist, anti-American” activism, “never to return”​. He and DHS Secretary Kristi Noem have conflated criticism of Israeli actions with antisemitism and terrorism advocacy, effectively branding peaceful protesters as enemies of the state. Noem stated that holding a visa or green card is a “privilege” and that if you “advocate for violence and terrorism,” it should be revoked – but in practice, the administration has applied this to people like Khalil who did not advocate violence, only voiced dissenting political views. There are reports of at least a dozen other foreign students or visitors who were quietly removed or had visas canceled after attending pro-Palestine rallies, under heightened social media surveillance by ICE and the State.

This creates a climate where non-citizens fear that speaking out could mean deportation. Such actions flagrantly violate the First Amendment, which protects “persons” – including non-citizens – on U.S. soil. The Supreme Court has held that the First Amendment applies to immigrants (see Bridges v. Wixon, 1945). The administration’s reliance on the 1952 law is also legally dubious: that law was historically used to bar communists during the Red Scare, a practice later repudiated. Using it now against protesters is seen by legal scholars as “legally baseless” and likely unconstitutional​. Indeed, many expect higher courts to overturn Khalil’s deportation order, but the fact remains that the President has pursued a policy of retaliatory deportation. This policy also likely violates federal civil rights statutes (for example, 8 U.S.C. § 1357 cannot be used to suppress free expression, and 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3) prohibits conspiracies to intimidate or retaliate against individuals for their views).

Legal Grounds: The President is sworn to uphold the Constitution. By directing his administration to deport immigrants for engaging in core political speech, he has abused his power and violated constitutional rights. This is an authoritarian use of immigration law – treating the First Amendment as optional for those without citizenship. Such conduct fits within “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” because it is a willful violation of constitutional rights by the Chief Executive. In past impeachment inquiries (e.g., articles drafted against President Nixon), misuse of federal agencies to punish critics was cited as an abuse of power. Here, Trump is misusing DHS and DOJ to punish free speech, which is arguably even more pernicious. Congress must hold him accountable to reaffirm that political freedom applies to all persons under U.S. jurisdiction, and that the presidency cannot be used as a tool of repression.