It is a grave weakness in the American constitution that the rights of foreign nationals have not been declared or compared to the actual nationals. On this particular regard the Argentina constitution really upended the American one with its preamble declaring: this constitution is made to protect the liberties [...] of all those who wish to live in Argentinian soil.
>> The government may not criminally punish immigrants based on speech that would be protected if said by a citizen.
Non-citizens can be denied entry to the U.S. based on things they've said that, if said by a citizen/permanent resident, would be "protected" speech under the first amendment. (Which is why the government looking at someone's social media history before deciding whether or not to issue a visa is troubling.)
There's also some grey-area with respect to people on short-term visas and undocumented immigrants because a non-citizen/non-permanent resident doesn't have any permanent "right" to be/remain in the country.
> The government may not criminally punish immigrants based on speech that would be protected if said by a citizen.
> Non-citizens can be denied entry to the U.S. based on things they've said that, if said by a citizen/permanent resident, would be "protected" speech under the first amendment.
Strange to me to draw this distinction. Denying entry is a prohibition exercised by the state. If you can be punished in any way, you don't have a right.
Those are people that are already in, not the people that are out. There's plenty you can't say as a foreigner on your way in that would be protected for a citizen.
Most rights in the US constitution, including the free speech right, apply to foreigners physically present within the US as well as to US citizens worldwide.
I do wonder if those rights would apply to those foreigners who apply for a US visa while physically in the US (or who are there during the relevant processing stage). Possibly yes because of their location at the time, but possibly not since the visa is not finally adjudicated until the foreigner leaves the US for a visa interview.
That article doesn't cite any cases showing that the first amendment or any similar constitutional provision applies to non-citizens abroad, and it makes an argument about the Muslim ban that has since been rejected by the Supreme Court's upholding of the ban.
It's definitely true, however, that foreigners in the US have that right, as do US citizens abroad with respect to US government actions where the US government knows or should know that they're a US citizen.
It is a grave weakness in the American constitution that the rights of foreign nationals have not been declared or compared to the actual nationals. On this particular regard the Argentina constitution really upended the American one with its preamble declaring: this constitution is made to protect the liberties [...] of all those who wish to live in Argentinian soil.