Pro-Hamas agitators may not agitate as much after President-elect Donald Trump takes office. Republicans in Congress and members of Trump’s team are working on strategies to deal with the wave of pro-Hamas protests and take legal action against activists, organizations and foreign students who support Hamas or other terrorist groups.
Efforts could include federal investigations, prosecutions and even deportations NBC News.
An NBC News review of congressional hearings and letters, as well as lawsuits from organizations led by former Trump officials, offers a glimpse into what federal laws a second Trump administration might apply in conducting investigations and possible prosecutions.
Judging from what has been pushed so far, there are several legal measures that will most likely be used once Trump returns to Washington. One would be deporting foreign college students in the U.S. on visas after they were found to have openly supported Hamas or another U.S.-designated terrorist group, or after they participated in an unauthorized protest on campus and have been suspended, expelled or imprisoned.
Another measure would be federal prosecution of protesters who block synagogue entrances or disrupt Jewish speakers at events. A third approach is to charge protest leaders and nonprofit organizations that support fundraise for protest groups for failing to register with the U.S. Department of Justice as a “foreign principal agent.” And a fourth way is to investigate protest leaders who are in direct contact with and advocate on behalf of U.S.-designated terrorist groups.
The multi-pronged law enforcement approach differs significantly from the Biden administration’s response to the protest movement. Some of the country’s leading civil rights groups told NBC News they are preparing for a barrage of litigation to protect protesters.
Trump allies have expressed solidarity with Trump’s plan to crack down on those who harass and attack Jewish Americans and others in the conflict between Israel and Hamas. “President Trump will enforce the law,” Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA) said in an email to NBC News.
Reed Rubinstein, senior vice president at America First Legal (AFL), reiterated that people “do not have the right to deny anyone the opportunity to gather in a church or synagogue.”
The Biden administration has done little to address the problem. The fact that pro-Hamas activists are engaging in behavior that goes far beyond elementary protests does not seem to bother the president and his team.
Some have raised concerns about possible First Amendment violations and argued that those who merely advocate for Palestinians could be unfairly criminalized.
Ben Wizner of the ACLU said:
“The courts have made clear that the First Amendment protects all types of controversial advocacy, including advocacy of violence, as long as the speaker does not actively incite imminent harm.”
Edward Ahmed Mitchell of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) compared the protests to the fight for civil rights by black Americans:
“Just like Americans who peacefully marched, protested and lobbied against segregation, the Vietnam War and South African apartheid were undeterred as government authorities spied on, vilified, arrested and brutalized them.”
Why do these people always apply the struggles of Black people to further their agenda?
But I digress.
The thing is, these protests have been occurring on university campuses and city streets since the Gaza War began on October 7, 2023. There are many people who are simply exercising their constitutionally protected right to freely express their views about Israel and the Palestinians.
However, there were also many activists who committed violent attacks against Jewish Americans while actively promoting Hamas and other terrorist organizations that not only sought to eradicate the Jewish presence in Israel but also committed violence in the United States. According to the report, these are the people Trump and Republicans want to target, not those who don’t commit violence.
There is a substantial difference between constitutionally protected speech and making threats, harassing people, or defacing property. Those who defend these thugs know this, but because they are sympathetic to the cause, they abhor the idea that the government would step in to stop them. Unfortunately, they won’t have much say in the matter.
