Page 39 - The Indian EYE 090525

IMMIGRATION SEPTEMBER 05, 2025 | The Indian Eye 39

any foreign state; (E) any section, sub- self-correct, grow and evolve. country he becomes invested with the subjecting those under its power to dis-
sidiary, branch, affiliate, or subdivision The First Amendment provides rights guaranteed by the Constitution favored treatment based on their opin-
of any such association or party…” is that “Congress shall make no law … to all people within our borders … ions. See generally Pahls v. Thomas,
not eligible for naturalization. abridging the freedom of speech, or including those protected by the First 718 F.3d 1210, 1239 (10th Cir. 2013).
INA§ 313(a), however, applies in of the press.” The Supreme Court has Amendment.” (cleaned up)). The Trump Administration can-
the naturalization context, where good made clear the Constitution’s “free- This has been established law for not broadly use anti-Americanism as a
moral is assessed more critically. This dom of speech and of press is accorded more than 70 years. See, e.g., Am.-Arab cudgel to punish noncitizens for speech
standard should not be used to deter- aliens residing in this country.” Wixon, Anti-Discrimination Comm. v. Reno, it disfavors. This is antithetical to the
mine whether a noncitizen’s actions are 326 U.S. at 148 (citing Bridges, 314 70 F.3d 1045, 1065 (9th Cir. 1995) principles set forth in the First Amend-
anti-American and constitute a basis U.S. 252). The First Amendment does ; Rafeedie v. I.N.S., 795 F. Supp. ment. Deploying anti-Americanism
for denying an application for adjust- not “acknowledge[] any distinction 13, 22 (D.D.C. 1992) as a weapon to punish noncitizens or
ment or reinstatement of status. This between citizens and resident aliens.” (“It has long been settled that would be entrants to the US would
is especially true if a noncitizen’s op- Kwong Hai Chew v. Colding, 344 U.S. aliens within the United States enjoy also diminish America’s standing in the
position to, for example, the Trump ad- 590, 596 n.5 (1953) the protection of the First Amendment world and would place it on par with a
ministration’s tariffs or Israel’s war in ; see also Wixon, 326 U.S. at 161 ….”) (footnote and citations omitted). pariah totalitarian state.
Gaza will be interpreted as anti-Amer- (Murphy, J., concurring) (“[O]nce an That is because the First Amendment *Kaitlyn Box is a Partner at Cyrus D.
ican outside the naturalization context. alien lawfully enters and resides in this operates as a restraint on government Mehta & Partners PLLC.
The Trump Administration offi- ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
cials are constantly reminding noncit- Cyrus D. Mehta, a graduate of Cambridge University and Columbia Law School, is the Managing Partner of Cyrus D. Mehta
izens that being on a visa in the US or & Partners PLLC in New York City. Mr. Mehta is a member of AILA’s Administrative Litigation Task Force; AILA’s EB-5 Com-
on a green card is a privilege and not
a right, and noncitizens need to follow mittee; former chair of AILA’s Ethics Committee; special counsel on immigration matters to the Departmental Disciplinary
the law to ensure that they stay out Committee, Appellate Division, First Department, New York; member of the ABA Commission on Immigration; board member
of trouble. We beg to disagree. How of Volunteers for Legal Services and board member of New York Immigration Coalition. Mr. Mehta is the former chair of the
does the USCIS define “anti-Ameri- Board of Trustees of the American Immigration Council and former chair of the Committee on Immigration and Nationality
canism.” Being critical of the Trump Law of the New York City Bar Association. He is a frequent speaker and writer on various immigration-related issues, including
administration or for that matter any
administration should not be deemed on ethics, and is also an adjunct professor of law at Brooklyn Law School, where he teaches a course entitled Immigration and
as anti-American. Indeed, it should be Work. Mr. Mehta received the AILA 2018 Edith Lowenstein Memorial Award for advancing the practice of immigration law
considered a virtuous activity to be crit- and the AILA 2011 Michael Maggio Memorial Award for his outstanding efforts in providing pro bono representation in the
ical of America or its administration as immigration field. He has also received two AILA Presidential Commendations in 2010 and 2016. Mr. Mehta is ranked among
it is through criticism and dissent that
we can reflect on all points of view, the most highly regarded lawyers in North America by Who’s Who Legal – Corporate Immigration Law 2019 and is also ranked
in Chambers USA and Chambers Global 2019 in immigration law, among other rankings.

www.TheIndianEYE.com