Terrorism

Cruz and King Bill Would Revoke Citizenship for (Foreign) Terrorist Groupies

SteveKing-wide

On Friday congressmen Steve King and Ted Cruz proposed the Expatriate Terrorist Act which would revoke citizenship for those who merely attempt to join a foreign terrorist organization, not just those who actually succeed at doing so. But that’s not all.

The bill unveiled by King and Cruz is far-reaching and would also revoke citizenship for reasons such as, but not limited to, providing “training or material assistance to a foreign terrorist organization” or taking an oath to a foreign terrorist organization.

Ironically, the King and Cruz bill would also revoke citizenship for those who attempt “by force to overthrow, or bearing arms against, the United States” and those who “engage in a conspiracy to overthrow” the United States.

KingCruzTerroristAct

There are certainly domestic terrorists and wannabe domestic terrorists who are guilty of these things. Will we revoke their citizenship?

I don’t think we should revoke anyone’s citizenship, but if we’re going to do so I believe the policy should be applied equally to all terrorists.

If we’re being honest, the Cruz and King bill is clearly aimed at Islamic terrorists, not right wing terrorists. The language of the bill could easily be applied to domestic terrorists, but including them would mean including some of Cruz and King’s constituents.

  • bphoon

    Whatever happened to “the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants” and “2nd Amendment options”?

  • muselet

    … providing “training or material assistance to a foreign terrorist organization” …

    Depending how this preposterous act is worded, it could leave Peter King—now Congressman but for many years a top bagman for the IRA—a man without a country.

    That would be funnier than Snakes In A Can.

    –alopecia

  • Christopher Foxx

    If we’re being honest, the Cruz and King bill is clearly aimed at Islamic terrorists, not right wing terrorists. The language of the bill could easily be applied to domestic terrorists, but including them would mean including some of Cruz and King’s constituents.

    And, again, the best response to these narrow-minded stupidities is to make sure folks know just how you would use them if they are passed.

    Open carry all the time everywhere advocates would rip up their legislation if huge numbers of black folks started eagerly waiting for the bill to pass. Manger-display-in-City-Hall’s-lobby proponents would rapidly back away when scores of Stanists start filing applications for space in anticipation of the law.