Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They'll have the hearings they're entitled to before immigration judges and then will be thrown out. I won't miss them, and don't consider their deportation or the future absence of their revolting advocacy to represent any loss to this country whatsoever. If they want to come here and study, fine. if they want to come here to agitate on behalf of non-American interests, don't let the door hit you on the back on your way out.

The whole point is that they’re NOT having those hearings. They’re not getting due process.

HELLO. You don't get a hearing.

Read 50 USC 21. It's ONE paragraph. Then we can talk.

Holy shit! We’ve declared war against Syria, India, and Turkey and nobody is even talking about it?!

Please, dear god, please promise me that this legal beagle is prosecuting the case!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tried to post this in colleges but Jeff really wants it here!

Tufts community critical of President Kumar's response:

"The petition calls on Tufts to commit to a variety of steps to protect international students, including paying for immigration lawyers, making free housing available on campus for vulnerable community members to increase the protection the school can provide them, and publicly affirming that the school will protect the right to free speech on campus.

“The only approach – practical and ethical – is a full-throated commitment to resisting the US administration’s oppressive policies and to the maintenance of the rights and dignity of all persons,” the petition states. ”Tufts has an opportunity to take a principled and historic stance against this authoritarian crackdown on student free speech in general, speech regarding Palestine in particular, and on the rights of non-citizens in the United States as a whole.”

The petition asserts that Tufts’ longstanding connections to the international community will be risk if the administration does not defend Ozturk and the right to free speech.

“International students, scholars, and staff are and have been critical contributors to Tufts’ educational and research excellence,” the petition reads. “A failure to protect their rights, freedom and dignity in today’s political climate will be a betrayal to that legacy and do irreparable harm to the University’s international standing.”

Signers also signaled they would end financial support for Tufts and “cease recommending that prospective students attend” the university."

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2025/03/27/metro/tufts-ozturk-trump-immigration-crackdown-pro-palestine/

Tufts is in a very tough spot because the school - both undergrad and graduate - is highly dependent on wealthy full-pay foreign students. Tufts, along with NYU and USC, is one of the premier liberal arts schools for wealthy foreign students who couldn't get into an Ivy. Every overseas parent with a kid at Tufts is sh#tting themselves.

Excellent point. Tufts' student population is 15 percent international. Other area colleges have even higher foreign student populations:

Northeastern University (38%)
Boston University (29%).
Harvard University has 7,800 international students (16%)
MIT has 5,300 international students (29%)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tried to post this in colleges but Jeff really wants it here!

Tufts community critical of President Kumar's response:

"The petition calls on Tufts to commit to a variety of steps to protect international students, including paying for immigration lawyers, making free housing available on campus for vulnerable community members to increase the protection the school can provide them, and publicly affirming that the school will protect the right to free speech on campus.

“The only approach – practical and ethical – is a full-throated commitment to resisting the US administration’s oppressive policies and to the maintenance of the rights and dignity of all persons,” the petition states. ”Tufts has an opportunity to take a principled and historic stance against this authoritarian crackdown on student free speech in general, speech regarding Palestine in particular, and on the rights of non-citizens in the United States as a whole.”

The petition asserts that Tufts’ longstanding connections to the international community will be risk if the administration does not defend Ozturk and the right to free speech.

“International students, scholars, and staff are and have been critical contributors to Tufts’ educational and research excellence,” the petition reads. “A failure to protect their rights, freedom and dignity in today’s political climate will be a betrayal to that legacy and do irreparable harm to the University’s international standing.”

Signers also signaled they would end financial support for Tufts and “cease recommending that prospective students attend” the university."

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2025/03/27/metro/tufts-ozturk-trump-immigration-crackdown-pro-palestine/

Tufts is in a very tough spot because the school - both undergrad and graduate - is highly dependent on wealthy full-pay foreign students. Tufts, along with NYU and USC, is one of the premier liberal arts schools for wealthy foreign students who couldn't get into an Ivy. Every overseas parent with a kid at Tufts is sh#tting themselves.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those that may be wondering, like me, why the Turkish student was taken to a facility far away in Louisiana, here is an answer from a query I posed to Grok. Earlier in the week I read a similar analysis in an online publication but can't find the cite. This summary from Grok does a good job of addressing the main points of what I read. There are two reasons: infrastructure (availability of a long-term holding facility for women) and political (Louisiana is a conservative state with a conservatives court of appeals more favorable to the government's position).

1) The decision to transfer Ozturk to Louisiana, rather than detain her in Massachusetts where she resides, appears to stem from logistical and strategic factors related to ICE's infrastructure and legal considerations. Massachusetts does not have an ICE detention facility specifically equipped to hold women long-term. According to immigration experts, such as Aaron Reichlin-Melnick from the American Immigration Council, women detained by ICE in Massachusetts are typically transferred to facilities in southern states like Louisiana, where the agency maintains several detention centers, including the one in Basile. This facility is one of nine in Louisiana used for immigrants awaiting legal proceedings or deportation.

2) Additionally, the transfer to Louisiana places Ozturk under the jurisdiction of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, known for its conservative leanings. This could influence the legal proceedings, as immigration cases in this circuit may face judicial precedents less favorable to detainees challenging their detention or deportation. Critics, including Ozturk’s legal team and supporters, argue that this move complicates access to her attorneys and family, who are based in Massachusetts, and may be intended to hinder her ability to mount an effective defense.

Louisiana also treats prisoners like slaves.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not understanding the point people are making. The explanation from Rubio says she was taken because her visa was rejected, so there was that first that triggered it. As for revoking a visa, they can for any reason. If she had said she intends to write political op-eds while being a grad student then she would not have been granted that visa. Then as explained by Rubio, when they found she lied on her visa they decided to revoke it. What's the issue? A visa is not a license to do anything including political speech, it's granted to come here and study that's it.

Students on visa are allowed to have political opinions. They’re even allowed to write about them in their student newspapers! This has never been grounds for revoking a visa.

Face up to the fact that they revoked it for political reasons. She criticized Israel! That’s it 😂

Anonymous wrote:Tried to post this in colleges but Jeff really wants it here!

Tufts community critical of President Kumar's response:

"The petition calls on Tufts to commit to a variety of steps to protect international students, including paying for immigration lawyers, making free housing available on campus for vulnerable community members to increase the protection the school can provide them, and publicly affirming that the school will protect the right to free speech on campus.

“The only approach – practical and ethical – is a full-throated commitment to resisting the US administration’s oppressive policies and to the maintenance of the rights and dignity of all persons,” the petition states. ”Tufts has an opportunity to take a principled and historic stance against this authoritarian crackdown on student free speech in general, speech regarding Palestine in particular, and on the rights of non-citizens in the United States as a whole.”

The petition asserts that Tufts’ longstanding connections to the international community will be risk if the administration does not defend Ozturk and the right to free speech.

“International students, scholars, and staff are and have been critical contributors to Tufts’ educational and research excellence,” the petition reads. “A failure to protect their rights, freedom and dignity in today’s political climate will be a betrayal to that legacy and do irreparable harm to the University’s international standing.”

Signers also signaled they would end financial support for Tufts and “cease recommending that prospective students attend” the university."

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2025/03/27/metro/tufts-ozturk-trump-immigration-crackdown-pro-palestine/

Anonymous wrote:Tried to post this in colleges but Jeff really wants it here!

Tufts community critical of President Kumar's response:

"The petition calls on Tufts to commit to a variety of steps to protect international students, including paying for immigration lawyers, making free housing available on campus for vulnerable community members to increase the protection the school can provide them, and publicly affirming that the school will protect the right to free speech on campus.

“The only approach – practical and ethical – is a full-throated commitment to resisting the US administration’s oppressive policies and to the maintenance of the rights and dignity of all persons,” the petition states. ”Tufts has an opportunity to take a principled and historic stance against this authoritarian crackdown on student free speech in general, speech regarding Palestine in particular, and on the rights of non-citizens in the United States as a whole.”

The petition asserts that Tufts’ longstanding connections to the international community will be risk if the administration does not defend Ozturk and the right to free speech.

“International students, scholars, and staff are and have been critical contributors to Tufts’ educational and research excellence,” the petition reads. “A failure to protect their rights, freedom and dignity in today’s political climate will be a betrayal to that legacy and do irreparable harm to the University’s international standing.”

Signers also signaled they would end financial support for Tufts and “cease recommending that prospective students attend” the university."

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2025/03/27/metro/tufts-ozturk-trump-immigration-crackdown-pro-palestine/

Anonymous wrote:
This is ALL wrong, but if you can’t see that, try starting with what you would think if two guys in jeans and sweatshirts grabbed you and shoved you in a car.

BTW, this is to desensitize you to what they’re going to start doing to citizens.

Read a history book and it’s not inconceivable that we’ll all eventually be locked up for expressing opinions here.

Anonymous wrote:
This is ALL wrong, but if you can’t see that, try starting with what you would think if two guys in jeans and sweatshirts grabbed you and shoved you in a car.

BTW, this is to desensitize you to what they’re going to start doing to citizens.

Read a history book and it’s not inconceivable that we’ll all eventually be locked up for expressing opinions here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those that may be wondering, like me, why the Turkish student was taken to a facility far away in Louisiana, here is an answer from a query I posed to Grok. Earlier in the week I read a similar analysis in an online publication but can't find the cite. This summary from Grok does a good job of addressing the main points of what I read. There are two reasons: infrastructure (availability of a long-term holding facility for women) and political (Louisiana is a conservative state with a conservatives court of appeals more favorable to the government's position).

1) The decision to transfer Ozturk to Louisiana, rather than detain her in Massachusetts where she resides, appears to stem from logistical and strategic factors related to ICE's infrastructure and legal considerations. Massachusetts does not have an ICE detention facility specifically equipped to hold women long-term. According to immigration experts, such as Aaron Reichlin-Melnick from the American Immigration Council, women detained by ICE in Massachusetts are typically transferred to facilities in southern states like Louisiana, where the agency maintains several detention centers, including the one in Basile. This facility is one of nine in Louisiana used for immigrants awaiting legal proceedings or deportation.

2) Additionally, the transfer to Louisiana places Ozturk under the jurisdiction of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, known for its conservative leanings. This could influence the legal proceedings, as immigration cases in this circuit may face judicial precedents less favorable to detainees challenging their detention or deportation. Critics, including Ozturk’s legal team and supporters, argue that this move complicates access to her attorneys and family, who are based in Massachusetts, and may be intended to hinder her ability to mount an effective defense.

Louisiana also treats prisoners like slaves.

Anonymous wrote:For those that may be wondering, like me, why the Turkish student was taken to a facility far away in Louisiana, here is an answer from a query I posed to Grok. Earlier in the week I read a similar analysis in an online publication but can't find the cite. This summary from Grok does a good job of addressing the main points of what I read. There are two reasons: infrastructure (availability of a long-term holding facility for women) and political (Louisiana is a conservative state with a conservatives court of appeals more favorable to the government's position).

1) The decision to transfer Ozturk to Louisiana, rather than detain her in Massachusetts where she resides, appears to stem from logistical and strategic factors related to ICE's infrastructure and legal considerations. Massachusetts does not have an ICE detention facility specifically equipped to hold women long-term. According to immigration experts, such as Aaron Reichlin-Melnick from the American Immigration Council, women detained by ICE in Massachusetts are typically transferred to facilities in southern states like Louisiana, where the agency maintains several detention centers, including the one in Basile. This facility is one of nine in Louisiana used for immigrants awaiting legal proceedings or deportation.

2) Additionally, the transfer to Louisiana places Ozturk under the jurisdiction of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, known for its conservative leanings. This could influence the legal proceedings, as immigration cases in this circuit may face judicial precedents less favorable to detainees challenging their detention or deportation. Critics, including Ozturk’s legal team and supporters, argue that this move complicates access to her attorneys and family, who are based in Massachusetts, and may be intended to hinder her ability to mount an effective defense.