Top Trump official Stephen Miller’s recent declaration that anyone who “preaches hate for America” will face deportation has ignited alarm online, with critics warning the statement disregards First Amendment protections.

Social media users and legal analysts raised immediate concerns, pointing out that expressing dissent or criticism of the government is protected under the First Amendment. Some worried the administration was veering into authoritarian territory.

The backlash has reignited broader debates over the limits of free speech, especially as civil liberties fall under scrutiny. While immigration enforcement remains a core theme of President Donald Trump’s platform, critics are increasingly questioning whether rhetoric like Miller’s is a precursor to more aggressive suppression of dissent.

  • Jason2357@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 hour ago

    Wow, what a dumb thing to claim when you have surrounded yourself with “free speech absolutists”. They are going to lose it on him, right? …. Right?

  • TON618@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    If America wants people to stop hating, maybe instead of trying to wipe it’s ass with the first amendment, it should stop cultivating hate with it’s actions.

    • Thedogdrinkscoffee@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      57 minutes ago

      If America wants people to stop hating

      What makes you think that is on the agenda? Hate is their specialty. A divided people are no threat to the oligarchy. Hate for breakfast, lunch and dinner.

    • SwordandArt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Hate has been actively cultivated online through various psyop campaigns over the years. It may have started offline but it skyrocketed with the growth of the internet to specifically destabilize the US.

    • Snowclone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      It wasn’t. At all. And you can clearly see armed people aren’t lining up to stop a clearly lawless authoritarian tyrant from holding power over them.

      • barneypiccolo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        This all just got started. People are still hoping something changes before they have to commit murder. By next summer, the attitude will be different.

        • Snowclone@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          37 minutes ago

          The law was put on place to maintain a standing US military, which was used to crush rebellions. People aren’t attacking the government to put down tyranny. That’s not a function of the US legal system.

    • whoisearth@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I’m gonna laugh so hard if the polls are correct (Canada has less of an issue here) and Trump causes Pierre Populism to go from a majority to a minority. I’m still voting and I am encouraging everyone I know to as well.

  • Prethoryn Overmind@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Some worried the administration was veering into an authoritarian territory.

    Yeah no fucking shit. It has been happening since he got into office you fucking dipshits.

    • jabeez@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      48 minutes ago

      Yep, and in no small part because of this shit right here, mealy-mouthed normalizing of a fascist.

  • laurelraven@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    9 hours ago

    “Veering into authoritarian territory”?! They set course for that the moment he was sworn in and floored it, have you not been paying attention?!

  • opus86@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    8 hours ago

    After all the stuff Stephen Miller pulled during Trumps first term, I can’t believe no one made sure he couldn’t do it again. Apparently, I’m an idiot for thinking someone would hold him accountable.

  • p3n@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    13 hours ago

    I can hardly believe that we have devolved so far, so quickly. We are literally one step away from becoming an authoritarian dictatorship. The plan is this:

    1. Deport (and by deport, they mean imprison for life) immigrants. These immigrants will mostly be legitimately illegal and gang associated criminals, but there will be a few individuals with legal standing and no criminal records. This could simply be the result of denying due process, or it could be an intentional test. The important factor is that 5th Amendment Due process rights are denied to all of them. The fact that these people (but be sure to de-humanize them as much as possible) are immigrants will be the distracting factor. <---- We are here

    2. Deport (and by deport, they mean imprison for life) criminals. These will be legitimate criminals with legitimately horrible records; that will be the distracting issue that will be made the focus of the argument: “They are serial killers, rapists, pedophiles, we don’t want them here, so we should get rid of them.” This has already been announced as the plan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUfrwWz-m5I . That is not the point! The point is that they are still U.S. citizens, despite their crimes. The significance of this is that it will be the final barrier that needs to be broken, and the final protection that must be dismantled for the final solution to be enacted. If no one steps up and successfully defends the constitutional rights of these American citizens, then all the pieces will be in place for step 3.

    3. Deport (and by deport, they mean imprison for life) political dissidents, rivals, business opponents, and maybe just anyone the administration doesn’t like. If they are political dissidents they will claim that they have committed crimes like, “hate speech against America™”, if they are a minority, they will be “associated with gangs”, if they are business rivals it will have committed “economic terrorism”, or something like that. It doesn’t really matter because they eliminated due process in step 1 (remember that was the important factor, not the immigrant dis-tractor), and without due process they don’t have to prove any crimes. Our last defense would have been the simple fact that we are American Citizens, but we established that doesn’t matter in step 2 because they were “bad people”, but now the “bad people” are whoever the administration decides is bad.

    The context of the 5th amendment is important to understand its intent:

    Historically, the Fifth Amendment draws significant influence from English common law. The grand jury clause specifically dates back to the Magna Carta, and was designed to protect accused persons from prosecution by the English royalty. In keeping with that intention, the Constitution’s framers opted to adapt the grand jury to the Constitution, so as to protect citizens from prosecution by the federal government.
    Reagan Library

    Even in a Monarchy, which is not the form of government we are supposed to have, the Magna Carta offered protections against the King from prosecuting commoners, which is the origin of this amendment. We aren’t just devolving to pre-revolution America, which had enough disagreements with the rule of King George III that it sparked a war…no we are devolving to a pre-Magna Carta England type of Government. We are descending into middle-age feudalism with complete authoritarian rule… and we aren’t fortunate enough to have a dictator like Alfred the Great.