Last month, I was visiting Columbia University, and I saw a big protest full of masked students, surrounded by heavy police presence, to oppose the Gaza war. It was a surreal experience to see students passionately protesting, but at the same time, some of them were supporting violence against a particular group of people.
The United States government’s decision to revoke visas for international students participating in protest activity—particularly if the protest calls for violence or terror—leaves serious questions about the protection of free speech and national security. Students of all countries should be free to voice dissent peacefully and engage in civic discourse. Democracy is all about protest and public discourse, especially in America. Revoking or denying visas for protesting will likely silence legitimate expression and might cause a chilling effect on campus activism. These are techniques generally used by police states.
However, a clear line between peaceful protest and inciting violence must be drawn. If a student’s action goes beyond mere expression of opinion and instead inclines or encourages violence against a people—on the grounds of race, religion, or nationality—then the government must protect public safety. Promoting terrorism or bigotry is not to be protected under free speech.
The problem is distinguishing between unpopular opinions and genuine threats. While visa cancellation may be warranted in extreme cases, it should be done judiciously and with solid proof, following due process to avoid the suppression of freedom of expression under the pretext of security.
The USA is a land of freedom and free speech; let’s keep it like this.
Leave a Reply