SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
us department of state
State Dept. Official Signals Review of Foreigners 'Praising, Rationalizing, or Making Light of' Kirk Killing
"The US government seeking to punish those who make light of the incident is a complete betrayal of the First Amendment and spits in the face of the principle of free speech and debate," said one lawyer.
Sep 11, 2025
"So much for free speech."
That's how multiple social media users responded Thursday after a top official signaled on the platform X that the US Department of State will review foreigners' remarks on the Wednesday killing of Turning Point USA CEO and co-founder Charlie Kirk, a key ally of Republican President Donald Trump.
"In light of yesterday's horrific assassination of a leading political figure, I want to underscore that foreigners who glorify violence and hatred are not welcome visitors to our country," Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau wrote Thursday morning.
"I have been disgusted to see some on social media praising, rationalizing, or making light of the event, and have directed our consular officials to undertake appropriate action," Landau added. "Please feel free to bring such comments by foreigners to my attention so that the State Department can protect the American people."
Lawyers swiftly stressed that the comments Landau is aiming to track down would be "fully protected speech under the First Amendment" to the US Constitution.
American Immigration Council senior fellow Aaron Reichlin-Melnick said, "You can agree that it's a tragedy that a man was assassinated and also believe that the US government seeking to punish those who make light of the incident is a complete betrayal of the First Amendment and spits in the face of the principle of free speech and debate."
"It is appalling to see US government officials trying to police the speech of people outside the US and to direct consular officers to deny and strip visas from anyone who made a joke about Charlie Kirk's assassination—and rely on X for reports," he continued. "The First Amendment applies to the federal government; 'Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech.' Directing people to have a benefit denied and potentially be deported over a joke in very poor taste violates the First Amendment."
After one X user suggested visitors to the United States don't have the same rights as citizens, Reichlin-Melnick explained that "the First Amendment is a restriction on government action that applies even when the government seeks to restrict the speech of noncitizens. If you'd like, I can cite you dozens of court cases confirming that noncitizens enjoy First Amendment protections."
Kirk and his allies—including Trump—have long framed the late 31-year-old as a free speech supporter. A lengthy pop-up message about his death on the Turning Point USA website even says that "Charlie has become America's greatest martyr to the freedom of speech he so adored."
In response to Axios' reporting on Landau's threat, Jameel Jaffer, director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, sarcastically said: "Yes, this definitely seems like an appropriate and constitutional use of the State Department's surveillance authorities. And definitely a fitting way to honor a person whom Trump admin officials have labeled a First Amendment hero."
pretty wild that it so quickly became normalized that immigrants don’t have even basic free speech rightswww.axios.com/2025/09/11/c...
[image or embed]
— Olivia Messer (@oliviamesser.bsky.social) September 11, 2025 at 3:38 PM
Writer Miriam Elder similarly quipped, "The free speech government honoring the free speech martyr."
Trump also publicly fancies himself a protector of free speech, but since returning to office in January, he has targeted law firms that represent clients and causes he opposes, news outlets whose coverage he disagrees with, and foreign students who criticize Israel's US-backed genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.
Although elected officials across the US political spectrum have condemned Kirk's killing and his unidentified shooter remains at large, Trump claimed in a Wednesday night speech that the rhetoric of the "radical left" is "directly responsible" for his death.
The president also pledged that his administration "will find each and every one of those who contributed to this atrocity and to other political violence, including the organizations that fund it and support it, as well as those who go after our judges, law enforcement officials, and everyone else who brings order to our country."
While Kirk's fatal shooting has sparked widespread condemnation of all political violence, the far-right crusader's longtime critics have also highlighted his attacks on marginalized people, promotion of misinformation and conspiracy theories, and strong opposition to stricter gun laws—including his assertion that "it's worth to have a cost of unfortunately some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment."
Landau wasn't the only key official making threats about commentary on Kirk's killing. Congressman Clay Higgins (R-La.) said on X early Thursday that "I'm going to use congressional authority and every influence with Big Tech platforms to mandate immediate ban for life of every post or commenter that belittled the assassination of Charlie Kirk."
"If they ran their mouth with their smartass hatred celebrating the heinous murder of that beautiful young man who dedicated his whole life to delivering respectful conservative truth into the hearts of liberal enclave universities, armed only with a Bible and a microphone and a Constitution... those profiles must come down," he said. "So, I'm going to lean forward in this fight, demanding that Big Tech have zero tolerance for violent political hate content, the user to be banned from ALL PLATFORMS FOREVER."
"I'm also going after their business licenses and permitting, their businesses will be blacklisted aggressively, they should be kicked from every school, and their driver's licenses should be revoked," he added. "I'm basically going to cancel with extreme prejudice these evil, sick animals who celebrated Charlie Kirk's assassination. I'm starting that today. That is all."
Several X users responded with examples of Higgins' long history of problematic commentary.
Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) CEO Greg Lukianoff told Higgins: "No. The state may not coerce private institutions to censor speech that the state itself cannot censor under the First Amendment. Besides, you are not safer for knowing LESS about what people really think."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump to Sidestep Cold War Arms Control Treaty to Sell More Drones: Report
The policy shift—which began during the first Trump administration—came after lobbying from US drone makers and amid stiff competition from Chinese, Israeli, and Turkish manufacturers.
Sep 05, 2025
After years of lobbying from US weapons makers, President Donald Trump is reportedly set to implement his first-term reinterpretation of a Cold War-era arms control treaty in order to sell heavy attack drones to countries including Saudi Arabia, according to a report published Friday.
In July 2020, Trump announced that his administration would reclassify unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) with flight speeds under 500 miles per hour—including General Atomics' MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper and Northrop Grumman's Global Hawk—as exempt from certain restrictions under the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR).
Signed by the United States in 1987 during the administration of President Ronald Reagan, the 35-nation MTCR "seeks to limit the risks of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction by controlling exports of goods and technologies that could make a contribution to delivery systems" for such weapons, as the US State Department website explains.
The end of Trump's first term limited his first administration's implementation of the MTCR policy shift, which was not continued under former President Joe Biden, who adopted a somewhat stricter stance on arms exports to some gross human violators including Saudi Arabia, but not others—most notably Israel.
Now, a US official and four people familiar with the president's plan tell Reuters that Trump is preparing to complete the MTCR revision, a move that "would unlock the sale of more than 100 MQ-9 drones to Saudi Arabia, which the kingdom requested in the spring of this year and could be part of a $142 billion arms deal announced in May."
As Reuters reported:
Under the current interpretation of the MTCR, the sale of many military drones is subject to a "strong presumption of denial" unless a compelling security reason is given and the buyer agrees to use the weapons in strict accordance with international law.
The new policy will allow General Atomics, Kratos, and Anduril, which manufacture large drones, to have their products treated as "Foreign Military Sales" by the State Department, allowing them to be easily sold internationally, according to a US official speaking to Reuters on condition of anonymity.
This effort is the first part of a planned "major" review of the US Foreign Military Sales program, the official said.
The US State Department did not respond to Reuters' request for comment on the policy shift.
Trump's move comes as US arms makers face stiff competition from Chinese, Israeli, and Turkish drone manufacturers. Neither China nor Israel are signatory to the MTCR, and Turkey, which did sign the agreement, features lighter and shorter-range UAVs not subject to the same restrictions as the heavier Reaper.
The US official who spoke to Reuters said the new guidelines will allow the US "to become the premier drone provider instead of ceding that space to Turkey and China."
Daryl Kimball, director of the Arms Control Association—a longtime critic of MTCR revision—warned that Trump's planned reinterpretation "would be a mistake."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Bid to Block $4.9 Billion With 'Pocket Rescission' Blasted as 'Authoritarianism 101'
"Congress—and only Congress—passes budgets. Because the president's job is to take care the laws are faithfully executed, he must spend the money as directed," said Rep. Jamie Raskin, a constitutional scholar.
Aug 30, 2025
Democracy defenders and members of Congress are condemning US President Donald Trump's effort to use a "pocket rescission" process to block $4.9 billion in foreign aid as authoritarian and illegal.
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on Friday shared on social media Trump's letter to House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) about the move. According to a White House fact sheet linked in a subsequent post, much of the money was headed for the US Department of State and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), which Trump has gutted.
As The Associated Press explained:
The 1974 Impoundment Control Act gives the president the authority to propose canceling funds approved by Congress. Congress can within 45 days vote on pulling back the funds or sustaining them, but by proposing the rescission so close to September 30 the White House argues that the money won’t be spent and the funding lapses.
What was essentially the last pocket rescission occurred in 1977 by Democratic then-President Jimmy Carter, and the Trump administration argues it's a legally permissible tool despite some murkiness as Carter had initially proposed the clawback well ahead of the 45-day deadline.
Shortly after the OMB social media posts, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that OMB Director Russ Vought was helping shutter USAID, writing on the platform X: "Since January, we've saved the taxpayers tens of billions of dollars. And with a small set of core programs moved over to the State Department, USAID is officially in closeout mode. Russ is now at the helm to oversee the closeout of an agency that long ago went off the rails. Congrats, Russ."
Meanwhile, Rubio's former congressional colleagues and others are sounding the alarm over the administration's effort.
"America is staring down next month's government funding deadline on September 30," said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.). "It's clear neither Trump nor congressional Republicans have any plan to avoid a painful and entirely unnecessary shutdown. With Trump's illegal 'pocket rescission': They seem eager to inflict further pain on the American people, raising their healthcare costs, compromising essential services, and further damaging our national security."
Congressman Joaquin Castro (D-Texas) also put pressure on GOP lawmakers, saying that "this is wrong—and illegal. Not only is Trump gutting $5 billion in foreign aid that saves lives and advances America's interests, but he's doing so using an unlawful 'pocket recission' method that undermines Congress' power of the purse. I urge my Republican colleagues to say hell no."
While most Republicans on Capitol Hill have backed Trump's endeavors to claw back funding previously appropriated by Congress, GOP Sens. Susan Collins (Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) voted against his $9 billion rescission package earlier this year.
Collins, chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, also spoke out against Trump's new move, noting in a Friday statement that under the US Constitution, Congress has "the power of the purse," and the Government Accountability Office "has concluded that this type of rescission is unlawful and not permitted by the Impoundment Control Act."
Congressman Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), a constitutional scholar, similarly stressed that "Congress—and only Congress—passes budgets. Because the president's job is to take care the laws are faithfully executed, he must spend the money as directed. Trump's 'pocket recissions' are lawless and absurd. If a president opposes legislative spending decisions, he can veto them, subject to override, but once passed, he must execute on them."
Lisa Gilbert, co-president of the watchdog group Public Citizen, declared in a Friday statement that with the pocket rescission move, the Trump administration "demonstrated yet again its contempt for Congress' power of the purse and the Constitution's separation of powers."
"With this Constitution-mocking action, the administration is bringing us closer to a shutdown on September 30, and it doesn't seem to care," Gilbert said. "We call on Congress to push back, pass and abide by appropriations packages, and fight the administration’s illegal impoundments that harm regular Americans."
"This is not just a constitutional crisis, it's a matter of global justice," she added. "The congressionally appropriated funds that the Trump administration illegally aims to cancel support economic development programs to empower the world's most vulnerable and impoverished, and address some of the ravage of catastrophic climate change in developing nations."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular