A passport isn’t a right by any stretch of the imagination. Even immigration attorneys would laugh you out of the room for suggesting that. Like it or not, passports are property of the government of the country that issues them. That is the global standard, and every single country plays it like that.
If some Trustafarian idiot goes to Costa Rica and spends all their money smoking weed and shows up at the embassy asking to be sent home, their passport gets held once they get back until they pay back the plane ticket. Which is perfectly legal and been how it has worked for decades.
The US government may only revoke passports for reasons of national security. Someone being behind on bills does not meet that criteria. See Haig v. Agee, 453 U.S. 280
"In Haig v. Agee, the United States Supreme Court held that the Secretary of State has the authority to revoke a passport when the bearer’s activities abroad “**are causing or are likely to cause serious damage to the national security or the foreign policy of the United States.” **
If I have a debt to the government, they send me collection letters and garnish my wages. They don’t take away my passport for such stuff. Stop with the normalization.
Normalization of removing rights. They’re coming after political opponents next.
What do you mean “next?” Watch closely which party the parents they pick on belong to. 10:1 odds they’re disproportionately Democratic.
Exactly.
A passport isn’t a right by any stretch of the imagination. Even immigration attorneys would laugh you out of the room for suggesting that. Like it or not, passports are property of the government of the country that issues them. That is the global standard, and every single country plays it like that.
If some Trustafarian idiot goes to Costa Rica and spends all their money smoking weed and shows up at the embassy asking to be sent home, their passport gets held once they get back until they pay back the plane ticket. Which is perfectly legal and been how it has worked for decades.
The US government may only revoke passports for reasons of national security. Someone being behind on bills does not meet that criteria. See Haig v. Agee, 453 U.S. 280
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/453/280/
https://commons.law.famu.edu/faculty-research/155/
"In Haig v. Agee, the United States Supreme Court held that the Secretary of State has the authority to revoke a passport when the bearer’s activities abroad “**are causing or are likely to cause serious damage to the national security or the foreign policy of the United States.” **
The Supreme Court can make up whatever bullshit they want. They just gutted the Voting Rights Act, why not this too?
Hey genius. Fuck Boarders.
What the fuck is wrong with you?
Nazi brain rot
If I have a debt to the government, they send me collection letters and garnish my wages. They don’t take away my passport for such stuff. Stop with the normalization.