Edit: yeah ok fair call. it needs to apply to anyone, still the US needs to be able to say : I dont like you, you cant enter.
Do you think it should apply only to citizens?
We can default to the Supreme Court's ruling in Bridges vs Wixon: "Freedom of speech and of press is accorded to aliens residing in this country.
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=107220981080384...
So, here is a question: is it for the US gov to tell me, a citizen "we don't like you and wouldn't let you enter if you weren't already here"? Because that certainly seems to be what they are saying? Does it make sense why I'd be worried about the government of the only place where I have citizenship letting me know that they would expel me if I hadn't been born here?
But even barring people from entry because they don't toe a partisan party line is pretty ludicrous for the "land of the free".
It was pointed out how historically un-American this is, and your response is to say we should in fact expand this policy - to be able to kick people out of the country or deny them entry for saying things online that aren't even as dramatic, hateful, or violence-glorifying as the things that this administration's supporters constantly, constantly, constantly say, for example, about victims of police shooting or victims of mass shootings?
I'll remove my comment if a clear case exists that is not generally celebrating it here.
Also note that in order to remove your comment, a clear case would have to exist in the first place.
> comments will state that the other side did it first.
That is exactly the excuse they are using for a lot of this type of sick behavior/policy, despite the examples being weak.