Maga regime judgments of foreign student applications

The maga regime intends to judge foreign student applications based on the students' opinions of various things about the US.

One requirement forbids "Any indications of hostility toward the citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles of the United States." That would include a wide range of opinions that are protected by the First Amendment.

* You might feel hostility towards US citizens who are bigots, or who own companies that exploit their workers.

* You might well dislike various aspect of US culture. I strongly dislike rap and blues, for instance, and weddings that are fancy and formal. I also dislike the sound of the accents of certain groups of Americans.

* You might find the government disgusting while billionaires have control of it and rig elections.

* You might condemn institutions such as churches that preach hatred or repression.

* You might abhor founding principles such as slavery and the disenfranchisement of blacks, women, and poor men.

Note that these criteria are all vague, leaving a broad range of possible places to draw the line of what is forbidden.

If these lines are drawn in the strictest and harshest place — which recent events must lead us to expect — they will be unconstitutional, if the First Amendment applies to what would-be students have said outside the US. But does it?

What about the next criterion: "advocacy for, aid or support for foreign terrorists and other threats to US national security"? Rejecting anyone who directly helps a terrorist group is legitimate; indeed such help would be a crime. But "aid or support" could be construed to include peacefully supporting the cause for which some terrorist group fights.

The last criterion, "support for unlawful antisemitic harassment or violence", could be a legitimate basis for objection provided the interpretation of that criterion scrupulously follows the First Amendment and does not misconstrue condemnation of Israel's war crimes as "antisemitism". But since officials are often frequently does misconstrue that, we have to expect this criterion to be wrongly enforced.

</li>