Due to immigration inspection, big concern It helped determine the voting choices of at least some voters, Screening of immigrants or sponsors of immigrationyou have to know that if you ask government officials to do something, they’ll take the ball and run with it, which is in the minds of many Americans who fear that the wrong people are getting in. there is. In the case of “vetting” (background checks to ensure that travelers, prospective immigrants, and their sponsors are not terrorists or criminals), the ultimate target is the person entering the country and, by necessity, the American citizen. A monitoring system will be introduced. Friends and Contacts.
you are reading rattlea weekly newsletter from JD Tucille, and reason. If you care about government overreach and clear threats to everyday freedoms, sign up. rattle. It’s free. Unsubscribe at any time.
Turn fear into a surveillance program
“Despite rebranding a federal program that monitors the social media activity of immigrants and international travelers to a more friendly name, the government will spend more than $100 million to continue monitoring people’s online activities.” I agreed to do it.” report Aaron McKee of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) says:
The issue began early in the Trump administration, when the president-elect responded to immigration concerns by building on previous border policies that called for “thorough vetting.”
President Trump said in a statement on January 27, 2017, “To protect Americans, the United States will ensure that those admitted to this country do not exhibit attitudes hostile to the United States or our founding principles.” There must be,” he said. presidential order We want a more rigorous vetting process. “America cannot and should not tolerate those who do not uphold the Constitution or who prioritize violent ideologies over American law.”
Security is a legitimate concern. But, says David J. Beer of the Cato Institute, pointed out In 2018, even with the most generous (for federal officials) assumptions, only 13 people, or 2 percent, of the 531 people convicted of or killed in terrorist crimes since 9/11. , entered the country due to failed screening” Post-9/11 security system. ”
The program quickly became much more than a request for documentation from immigrants and visitors’ home countries. The U.S. government wanted access to people’s online lives, especially their social media accounts, in order to continually monitor what they say and what they think. Private contractors wishing to participate in this program may expected “Technologies for leveraging public information such as media, blogs, public hearings, conferences, academic websites, social media websites such as Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn, radio, television, news organizations, geospatial sources, and Internet sites. ‘Analyze and apply ‘and professional publications. ”Surveillance was soon applied to millions of immigrants legally (People crossing the border without documents are a different matter and a bigger headache).
Same snooping, new name
When Joe Biden was elected president in 2020, he continued this program, McKee notes. The biggest change is that at some point the program was renamed the Visa Lifecycle Vetting Initiative (VLVI).
“We are disappointed that the Biden administration has decided to further strengthen the Trump-era policy of mass surveillance of visa applicants’ social media,” said Knight First Amendment Institute Director said attorney Carrie Dissel. commented In 2022.
“Social media vetting programs like VLVI are inherently insidious because an individual’s data can be retained indefinitely, shared widely across multiple federal agencies, and even disclosed to foreign governments. ” warned David Strom of online security company Avast.
The Knight First Amendment Institute supported two groups of documentary filmmakers. A lawsuit is filed to end the program.. The plaintiffs allege that government officials snooped on communications with visiting colleagues from abroad, scrutinized their communications and opinions expressed in their work (arguments are scheduled for December), and that They were concerned that the results would be shared with partner institutions in other countries.
“Regardless of the name used, the DHS program chills the speech of people seeking to enter the United States and allows authorities to target and punish those who express views they don’t like. “This raises serious concerns about freedom and the First Amendment,” the EFF added. Mackey.
EFF also complained Get an inside look at how online surveillance works.
Monitoring travelers means spying on you
Given that communication is rarely a solitary activity, monitoring immigrants and foreign travelers necessarily requires monitoring Americans as well. It is often intention Ostensibly a surveillance operation targeting foreigners, American correspondents are equally or even more interested.
Section 702 AuthorizationFor example, it is assumed to be directed to “people outside the United States.” But the federal Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB) warned in a 2023 report that “the government also often obtains significant amounts of Americans’ communications.” Such espionage against Americans “should not be understood as a rare occurrence or an unimportant part of the Section 702 program,” the report added.
This applies to agencies responsible for border security, as well as the FBI and other agencies accused of abusing Section 702. Three years ago, it was revealed that Customs and Border Protection (CBP) was conducting detailed background checks on critics, activists, and activists. Others are looking for personal information. Investigators say the country’s most sensitive databases are routinely used to obtain travel records, financial information, and personal information of journalists, government officials, members of Congress and their staff, NGO workers, and others. “I was there.” According to To Jana Winter Yahoo! news.
There is no reason to believe that yet another surveillance program, controlled by people who have repeatedly abused their power, will not follow the same path as previous ones. The sense that Big Brother is watching pervades not only immigrants and tourists, but also their friends and associates in this country.
“Knowing that the government regularly scrutinizes online statements to make entry or deportation decisions encourages both visa applicants and recipients and the people they communicate with to censor themselves online.” There is no doubt that there will be pressure to do so,” the Center for Democratic Technology said. opposed to the program.
Border security remains a concern for many Americans. But it is no surprise that government officials are eager to turn public anxiety into a blank check to expand their intrusive power.
