Rubio issues policy against foreigners ‘responsible for censorship of protected expression' in US
Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Wednesday announced a new visa restriction policy targeting foreign nationals who are deemed 'responsible for censorship of protected expression' in the U.S.
'Even as we take action to reject censorship at home, we see troubling instances of foreign governments and foreign officials picking up the slack. In some instances, foreign officials have taken flagrant censorship actions against U.S. tech companies and U.S. citizens and residents when they have no authority to do so,' Rubio said in a release.
The State Department called it 'unacceptable' to seek arrest warrants on U.S. citizens or residents over posts on U.S. social media platforms while on U.S. soil.
'It is similarly unacceptable for foreign officials to demand that American tech platforms adopt global content moderation policies or engage in censorship activity that reaches beyond their authority and into the United States,' Rubio said.
The new policy comes on the heels of a feud between X owner Elon Musk and Brazilian Supreme Court Judge Alexandre de Moraes after the social media platform was ordered to remove posts.
It also appears in line with a Republican-crafted 'No Censors on Our Shores' act that cleared the House Judiciary Committee earlier this year.
'Foreigners who work to undermine the rights of Americans should not enjoy the privilege of traveling to our country. Whether in Latin America, Europe, or elsewhere, the days of passive treatment for those who work to undermine the rights of Americans are over,' Rubio added in a post on the social media platform X.
According to the State Department, the new policy falls under the Immigration and Nationality Act, which gives the Secretary of State the power to deny 'any alien' whose entry into the U.S. 'would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
16 minutes ago
- Politico
Supreme Court limits outside access to DOGE records
The Supreme Court has reined in a lower-court order that allowed a watchdog group wide-ranging access to records of the Trump administration's Department of Government Efficiency. The high court's majority said a judge's directive allowing Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington to examine DOGE's recommendations for cost savings at executive branch agencies was 'not appropriately tailored.' In a two-page order Friday, the Supreme Court said such access was not a proper way to resolve an ongoing dispute about whether DOGE is a federal agency subject to the Freedom of Information Act or operates as a presidential advisory body that does not have to share its records with the public. 'Separation of powers concerns counsel judicial deference and restraint in the context of discovery regarding internal Executive Branch communications,' the court's majority wrote. All three of the court's liberal justices indicated they disagreed with the decision, but none provided an explanation of her views.
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Chris Hayes: Trump's 'secret police': Masked agents' sweeping immigration raids raise concern
This is an adapted excerpt from the June 5 episode of 'All In with Chris Hayes.' The term 'secret police' invokes a kind of haunting specter. When we see representations of it in movies or history, we immediately identify it with a certain kind of regime: One that tramples people's liberty with no accountability. We associate it with authoritarian governments and dictatorships like the former Soviet Union, where people, usually armed, could wield the authority of the state but were, themselves, totally unaccountable in the same way. Whatever issues there are with American policing — and there are many — at least our police officers have names on their uniforms and badge numbers. But now, in the era of immigration under Donald Trump, one cannot help but notice that in clip after clip, interaction after interaction, the people enforcing the president's policies have all the qualities that one would associate with the concept of 'secret police.' In videos, these individuals are usually masked and either wearing plain clothes or irregular uniforms. They won't give their names or say what agency they're with. Watching it feels wrong, weird, alien and menacing. It does not feel like these law enforcement officials are subject to the authority of a democratic government. It's so striking, in scene after scene, to see regular people asking masked agents, 'Who are you?' and 'What are you doing?' and not receiving an answer. That's what we saw play out in one of the first videos of this kind to be made public: The arrest of Columbia student and lawful resident Mahmoud Khalil. In that video, you can see plainclothes officers apprehending Khalil in the lobby of his building. The officers pointedly refused to identify themselves or what agency they were with. 'We don't give our name,' one man said, after handcuffing and detaining a legal resident of the United States. Not long after that, we got video of the arrest of Tufts University graduate student Rumeysa Ozturk, who was snatched off the street by masked agents and led away in handcuffs. In New Bedford, Massachusetts, there was the chilling scene from last month in which masked agents broke a car window and forcibly removed a man they say was in the country illegally. Just last weekend, in Great Barrington, Massachusetts, masked agents detained an apparently undocumented gardener at his place of work. In San Diego that same weekend, residents tried to hold back what appeared to be militarized agents who were reportedly executing an immigration raid on local businesses. We've also got allegations of all kinds of lies, manipulation and subterfuge. Eyewitnesses in Tucson, Arizona, allege agents posed as city utility workers as part of an arrest attempt. There have been reports of agents performing wellness checks on children, which critics say is a trap for immigration enforcement. All this feels like something distinct from the normal forms of policing and law enforcement that we're used to. As the writer M. Gessen, who was born in the then-Soviet Union, put it in a column for The New York Times: 'The United States has become a secret-police state. Trust me, I've seen it before.' 'The citizens of such a state live with a feeling of being constantly watched. They live with a sense of random danger,' Gessen wrote. 'Anyone — a passer-by, the man behind you in line at the deli, the woman who lives down the hall, your building's super, your own student, your child's teacher — can be a plainclothes agent or a self-appointed enforcer.' This administration is treating people as if they have no rights, as if they can be rounded up at whim without any due process. That is the legal theory of the Trump administration. It believes that immigrants in this country don't have rights, even though that's very clearly not true. The Constitution is clear on this, and precedent is clear on this: Immigrants have due process rights. But the Trump administration seems to believe the state can do whatever it wants to people. According to Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, the agents in these videos are wearing masks for their own safety. 'They wear a mask because they're trying to protect themselves and their families,' Homan said on Fox News. 'Agents are getting doxed every day, their pictures and phone numbers being put on telephone poles. These leftists are following and filming when they go home from work at night.' In a statement to NBC News about these recent immigration crackdowns, Assistant Homeland Security Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said, 'Under Secretary Noem, we are delivering on President Trump's and the American people's mandate to arrest and deport criminal illegal aliens and make America safe.' This article was originally published on
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Republican Jim Carlin launches primary bid against U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst in week of campaign kickoffs
Former state Sen. Jim Carlin, shown here at a rally in October 2021, has launched a Republican campaign for U.S. senator. (Photo by Katie Akin/Iowa Capital Dispatch) Former state legislator Jim Carlin, a Republican, announced he is running for Iowa's U.S. Senate seat in the upcoming election — the latest candidate this week to announce their plans to run in 2026. Carlin, who served in the Iowa Senate from 2017 through 2023 and previously in the Iowa House, is running for the seat currently held by U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst. Since his time in the Iowa Legislature, Carlin went on to found the Iowa Liberty Network, an organization focused on recruiting and electing 'constitutional conservative' candidates in state government and other public offices. In an interview with the Iowa Capital Dispatch, Carlin said Ernst is not reflecting Iowa Republicans' values in Congress. He pointed to the Heritage Action scorecard for Ernst from the 2023 session, when she received a 42% score on how often her votes aligned with conservative goals. He pointed to her support for money to aid Ukraine in its war against Russia and her vote in favor of the Respect for Marriage Act as examples of Ernst not voting in line with conservative values. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Carlin said Ernst has not delivered on her commitment 'make 'em squeal' by cutting federal spending, as well as promises to work to repeal the Affordable Care Act and 2014 campaign statement that she would only serve two terms in the U.S. Senate. 'The people of Iowa can judge whether or not she's keeping those promises,' Carlin said. 'And I believe that when they … evaluate it, when they look at her voting record and the decisions she's made as a sitting senator, that they will come to the conclusion that she doesn't represent them well in terms of the things they want to see done and the things that they believe in.' Bryan Kraber, Ernst's 2026 campaign manager, pointed to Carlin's failed primary bid against U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley in the 2022 election. 'Good luck trying to take on this combat veteran,' Kraber said in a statement Friday. 'Senator Ernst has a proven record of conservative leadership—cutting waste, securing the border, and making Washington squeal to keep Iowans' hard-earned money in their own pockets. And she delivers for our families, farmers, and veterans. Iowans already saw through Carlin's last failed campaign, and they'll reject his desperate attempt at relevance again in 2026.' Though Carlin and Ernst are battling on conservative bonafides, much of the conversation centered on the upcoming race has focused on Ernst's town hall statement that 'we are all going to die' last week during talks on the funding cuts to Medicaid included in the budget reconciliation bill passed by the U.S. House. Carlin said he supports President Donald Trump's spending goals and believes cuts that should be made to federal programs but 'her handling of that showed a lack of judgment.' 'You don't flippantly say to people, 'well, we're all going to die,'' Carlin said. 'That actually kind of reminds me of Hillary Clinton's statement, 'what difference does it make,' on the other side of Benghazi when people died. I thought it was really inappropriate.' Iowa Rep. J.D. Scholten, D-Sioux City, announced Monday he would compete for the Democratic nomination, saying he 'just can't sit on the sidelines' following the Senator's comments. Scholten and Nathan Sage, a Mason City Democrat, are the only Democrats to have officially joined the race, but other potential Democratic candidates also weighed in on Ernst's comments this week. State Sen. Zach Wahls, D-Coralville, who has expressed interested in a run, said 'it is of course true that we are all going to die, but our Senators shouldn't be the ones killing us' in response to Ernst's comments. State Rep. Josh Turek, D-Council Bluffs, is also weighing a bid for the seat. Turek joined a call with Protect Our Care Iowa, an organization advocating for health care access through programs like Medicaid, on Thursday and said the proposal to reduce Medicaid spending by $625 billion in the next decade and implement work requirements will prevent more people with disabilities from accessing needed care. Republicans supporting the 'big, beautiful' tax and spending bill have repeatedly stated people with disabilities and complex medical conditions as well other protected populations, like minors, seniors, parents of dependent children and pregnant people will not be subject to work requirements or taken off the program. But Turek said as a person with a disability who has worked for an organization assessing and providing mobility devices, he has extensive experience with how funding cuts and moves like Iowa's Medicaid privatization have limited access to needed health care and services for Iowans with disabilities. The state legislator said he went to Washington, D.C., to speak with all members of Iowa's federal delegation about how the proposed changes will hurt people in need. 'I talked to them specifically about this bill and about the cuts to Medicaid, and additionally about what they're looking at doing on grant funding,' Turek said. 'And we're looking at 140 organizations and groups here in Iowa, disability services — beyond just Medicaid, that are looking at losing all of their funding in some cases, or 50%, 25%. They cannot plead ignorance. They know exactly what this bill is. It's a tax break to the richest, most wealthy Americans off the backs of the poorest and the most vulnerable.' Ernst's comment also led to another campaign launch for the Iowa House. India May, the 33-year-old from Charles City who sparked Ernst's comments on Medicaid during the Parkersburg town hall, is running for Iowa House District 58, currently represented by Republican Rep. Charley Thomson, R-Charles City. May, the Ionia Public Library director, is a county death investigator for Chickasaw County and registered nurse. She shouted 'people will die' at Ernst during the public meeting. 'People are not — well, we all are going to die, so for heaven's sake,' Ernst responded. The day after the meeting, Ernst made an 'apology video' filmed in a cemetery where she said she 'made an incorrect assumption that everyone in the auditorium understood that, yes, we are all going to perish from this earth.' 'So I apologize, and I'm really, really glad that I did not have to bring up the subject of the tooth fairy as well,' Ernst said in the video. She also added that 'for those that would like to see eternal and everlasting life, I encourage you to embrace my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.' In a social media post responding to the video, May wrote that Ernst's apology was 'disingenuous and reinforced gaslighting and christofascism aimed toward her MAGA supporters.' She also used the platform to highlight her own run for office. 'In short, my response to Joni's phoney apology is this: I don't want to see another Iowan choose between medicine or food. It's already happening and this bill will make it worse,' May wrote. '… Joni may be disappointed to know that I will continue to email her every day with my concerns, and that it is my intention to run as a progressive Democrat for Iowa House District 58, to undo the damage caused by the incumbent, Charley Thomson, who recently made headlines for targeting a nonprofit organization.' May had referenced the directive sent by Thomson in his capacity as the House government oversight committee chair to the Iowa Migrant Movement for Justice, an immigrant rights organization, requesting information about the nonprofit organization's clients, donors and members. An attorney for Iowa MMJ rejected the request in April, saying it was not legally valid. Iowa Rep. Eddie Andrews launched his bid for Iowa governor Wednesday, running as a Republican for the seat that will be vacated by Gov. Kim Reynolds following the 2026 election. Andrews, a Johnston Republican first elected in 2020, is one of the first GOP candidates to officially run in what is expected to be a crowded field. Former state Rep. Brad Sherman had announced he is running as a Republican gubernatorial candidate before Reynolds left the race. U.S. Rep. Randy Feenstra and Iowa Sen. Mike Bousselot, R-Ankeny, have both launched exploratory committees for a gubernatorial campaign, and other high-profile Iowa Republicans like Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird and House Speaker Pat Grassley have expressed interest but not made a decision on whether to run. In a news release on his run, Andrews said his work as a state lawmaker shows why Iowans should back his campaign — he highlighted his support for 'landowner rights' through supporting bills restricting the use of eminent domain in carbon sequestration pipeline projects, efforts to increase psychiatric residencies and provide more incentives to keep doctors in the state, as well as proposals to end sales tax on certain essential items. As governor, Andrews said he wants to focus on improving Iowa's education system, making mental health care more accessible, and pledged to 'destroy the human trafficking industry in our state.' 'Iowa deserves a Governor who listens and delivers,' Andrews said in a statement. 'My experience as a tech entrepreneur, minister and legislator prepares me to serve you.' Democrat Julie Stauch, a longtime Iowa political operative, also launched her campaign for governor this week. Iowa Auditor Rob Sand is considered the frontrunner in the Democratic gubernatorial primary, though Stauch alongside Democrat Paul Dahl will be competing against him in the primary June 2, 2026. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
