Rubio-Backed bill Sparks Concerns Over Passport Revocation Powers
WASHINGTON D.C. - A bill gaining traction in Congress would grant the Secretary of State broad authority too revoke U.S. passports from individuals suspected of providing material support to terrorism,raising alarm among civil liberties advocates who warn of potential abuse and due process violations. The legislation,spearheaded by Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL),has ignited a debate over the balance between national security and fundamental rights.
The bill, formally titled provisions within larger national security legislation, doesn’t explicitly define “material support,” leaving the decision largely to the discretion of the Secretary of State. Critics argue this vagueness could lead to the targeting of individuals and groups based on political beliefs or associations, rather than concrete evidence of illegal activity. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and other organizations are mobilizing opposition, fearing the measure could effectively chill dissent and circumvent established legal standards.
The proposed legislation includes a provision for affected citizens to appeal decisions to Rubio within 60 days,a safeguard dismissed by opponents as insufficient.”Basically,you can go back to the secretary,who has already made this determination,and try to appeal. There’s no standard set. There’s nothing,” said ACLU attorney Hamadanchy. He further suggested the appeal process appears designed to avoid the need for presenting evidence of legal violations.
While the bill has drawn limited opposition from libertarian-leaning conservatives like Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY), concerns extend beyond partisan lines.Critics, including Stern, warn the measure could be wielded by future administrations against political opponents. “What is to stop a future Democratic governance from designating an anti-abortion activist…to be a supporter of terrorism and target them the same way?” he questioned.
The bill’s advancement comes amid ongoing debates over government surveillance powers and the scope of national security measures. If enacted, it would substantially expand the executive branch’s ability to restrict international travel, potentially impacting a wide range of individuals and organizations. The Intercept has ongoing coverage of this developing story, available at https://theintercept.com/collections/chilling-dissent/.
