Nolan writes:
“Homeland Security searching some social media doesn’t violate privacy
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has posted a new rule on the Federal Register which authorizes adding information from an alien’s social media sites to the files that are kept in his/her official immigration records, such as “social media handles, aliases, associated identifiable information, and search results.”
The official immigration records are known as “A-Files.”
The social media sites will be searched for information which pertains to granting aliens a visa or some other type of immigration benefit, and this almost certainly will lead to social media searches of the American citizens and lawful permanent residents who sponsor them.
For instance, if a citizen files a visa petition to accord immediate relative status to his alien spouse, and information on the spouse’s Facebook site indicates that the marriage is a sham, DHS will search the citizen petitioner’s Facebook site for additional information to assist in determining whether the marriage really is a sham.
But the most important reason is to identify terrorists, and this is the reason that prompted 26 senators to ask DHS to search social media sites after the San Bernardino terrorist attack.
. . . .
The Electronic Frontier Foundation and the ACLU have filed a lawsuit to stop DHS from searching mobile electronic devices at the border in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I expect them to challenge social media checks on the same basis.
The Fourth Amendment states that “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.” But this only applies to situations where an individual has “a reasonable expectation of privacy,” which is not an easy concept to apply to social media information.
In any case, there is no expectation of privacy in immigration processes. Most, and perhaps all, of the persons involved in immigration processes have to authorize DHS to investigate them and the information they provide.
For instance, an American citizen or lawful permanent resident who files a visa petition for a relative has to fill out a Form I-130 Petition for Alien Relative, which requires extensive information about the petitioner, his/her spouse, and his/her parents. It requires similar information about the alien who is the beneficiary of the petition.
The petitioner also has to authorize the release of information that is needed for the adjudication of the petition, or that is “necessary for the administration and enforcement of U.S. immigration laws.”
The Form DS-160 Application for a Nonimmigrant Visa requires even more information, and it should be apparent to aliens applying for a visa that they are subject to background investigations.
I am not convinced, therefore, that social media searches violate privacy rights, and the San Bernardino terrorist attack has shown that information on social media sites can help DHS to identify terrorists before they strike.
**************************************
Go over to The Hill at the link to read Nolan’s complete analysis.
I guess the message here is that if you want privacy, stay off of social media. Otherwise, user beware!
PWS
10-02-17
Well put, Paul.
Thanks, Nolan!
Best,
P
Ultimately, it’s a matter of priorities. The social media angle is just another way to treat immigrants as a problem, instead of the needed solution for a 2017 problem: not enough younger Americans over the next 20 years until most baby boomers have passed.
Right now the USA median age is 56 years old The new Americans are the obvious solution to this demographic disaster of too few workers, too many retirees, except for those who insist on seeimg the new Americans as a contagion.
Imagine a fire in the neighborhood and the locals won’t let the firemen in to fight the fire until they each undergo a detailed background check including their social media ties. And their excuse? Darkies are drinking our milkshake according to Trump!