Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Government Social Networks United States

US Mulls Policing Social Media of Would-Be Citizens (theregister.com) 72

Posted by BeauHD from the stricter-rules dept.
The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is proposing to expand mandatory social media screening, currently required only for new arrivals, to include all non-citizens already residing in the U.S. who apply for immigration benefits. The Register reports: Back in 2019, the Department of Homeland Security, which runs USCIS, decided anyone looking to enter the US on a work visa or similar had to hand over their social media handles to the authorities so that they could be looked over for wrongdoing and subversion. In fact, this goes back to 2014, at least, to one degree or another, and has been standard procedure for years for foreigners, particularly those coming in on a visa. [...]

On January 20 this year, President Trump signed an executive order calling for much tougher vetting of foreign aliens, and in response, USCIS has proposed rules saying those already in the country who are going through some process with the agency -- such as applying for permanent residency or citizenship -- will have their social media scanned for subversion. That means if you came to America before foreigners' internet presence was screened as it now is, and you're now seeking some kind of immigration benefit, at this rate you'll be subject to the same scanning as those entering the Land of the Free today. The proposed changes have a 60-day comment period for the public to suggest amendments. The last day to send them in is May 5.

US Mulls Policing Social Media of Would-Be Citizens More | Reply

US Mulls Policing Social Media of Would-Be Citizens

Comments Filter:

  • Are we there yet (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jovius ( 974690 ) on Thursday March 06, 2025 @09:08PM (#65216773)

    The biggest red flag would probably be no presence on social media

    • The biggest red flag would probably be no presence on social media

      That’s almost as bad as not having a brain chip installed.

    • They will decide you're either lying, or are some Ted Kaczynski type. Both good excuses to put you in a camp of some sort in their eyes.

    • Re:Are we there yet (Score:5, Interesting)

      by skam240 ( 789197 ) on Thursday March 06, 2025 @09:36PM (#65216823)

      Most immigrants coming to the US are economic immigrants from the third or developing world. Even in this day and age it's not crazy for them to not have a social media account.

      • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

        by e3m4n ( 947977 )

        I thought the same until I learned that even the immigrants coming over in those giant caravans of migrants were carrying $800+ smartphones. Thats sort of how/why this policy got its start about 10years ago. It defies all logic that someone claiming to be seeking a life free of extreme poverty would have a device worth more than 6mo labor in some countries. But I guess if you want to get approved there are certain hoops you have to jump through. Some employers will demand social media account names to scree

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by skam240 ( 789197 )

          $800+ smart phones? I'm sure there are a very small number that do but I'd want to see some sort of citation before I'll believe that is in any way common. No offense meant.

          I know many have cheapo smart phones that they can do social media with but even then I wonder how wide speed that is, particularly in light of the fact that we have been giving smart phones in large numbers to immigrants to help with their processing https://www.google.com/url?sa=... [google.com] . Those people will not have any social media profil

        • I think we need to see some proper data on this before we believe it too much. I doubt there are many with a genuinely-purchased-for-$800-phone, but hey, maybe there are...?

          Having a smart phone? Yes - absolutely. But you can buy a smart phone (new) for like $100, and hooky back-street deals will likely see one for $10 or less. I wouldn't be surprised to see a few stolen iphones and maybe even phones that look like iphones but are actually a crappy alcatel inside or something.

          So as I say, is there any proper

        • If that is the case of $800+ smartphones it is because the mid-tier are not in abundance. Though you do not typcally know off hand just looking at them if someone has a year old refurbished phone. That phone looks like a expensive one because it once was. But it like car having multiple years of basically the same model generation they for a few years are the same model of phone though could be bought used and also not bought every year. https://mobile.slashdot.org/st... [slashdot.org]

      • You would think so, but you'd be wrong. Social media is HUGE in the developing world, especially for anyone under 60-70. It's how they get all of their news; everyone has a phone, and even if there is not cell service most villages with electricity have a Wi-Fi access point and EVERYONE WhatsApp to text and make calls and post in local groups.

        You know how you "recycle" your phone when you get a new one? Most of them go to South America, Africa, and Southeast Asia

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by e3m4n ( 947977 )

      I must be on a few watchlists then. Aside from /. I keep a very low profile. I wouldn’t necessarily call this social media.

    • The biggest red flag would actually be not using social media to post long, winding, pointless rants at 4am every day in all caps, while eating mcdonalds and applying your orange makeup.

    • Oh, dear.

      I've been here for decades, ever since I was conceived, as were all of my parents and grandparents, and most of my great-grandparents.

      Yet I have no social media presence.

      I tried it for a week or two, and it was maddening.

      All kinds of flashing adds, generic messages from the zuckertwit, and accounts of high school friends breakfast plates.

      Oh, not to mention the random thoughts passing through strangers low performance brains . . .

  • Seems inefficient (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Why would a true "subversive" want citizenship?
    So they can serve on a jury?

  • Wont make much difference (Score:4, Insightful)

    by hdyoung ( 5182939 ) on Thursday March 06, 2025 @09:54PM (#65216851)
    Most immigrants are a) fleeing from a very grim situation, b) paid a LOT of money to get here, or c) physically risked their lives and basically ran a triathlon to make it here. The last thing theyre gonna do is utterly blow it by picking up a criminal record or talking sh&t. The vast majority of immigrants keep their heads down and are VERY law abiding. Crime rates among immigrants are much lower than citizens. Despite what you hear on right wing media.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      The Right hasn't been complaining about the immigrants who don't commit crimes, but those who do. For them, the fact that the majority of them don't commit crimes isn't relevant. What is relevant is that crime could be prevented through screening.

      If you believe immigrants should be exempt from background checks because of their low criminality, would you exempt gun buyers as well? After all, gun owners are some of the most law-abiding citizens around. Even so, the RIght would think it insane to remov

    • Yep. It's all about politicization and authoritarian control by people who are loyal first to their public image and their net worth, but it has the effect of pissing on the Constitution and freedom that make a mockery of the principles of America.

    • "Won't make much of a difference" if we take for granted that their social media will be assessed in good faith for unlawful activity. Want to place bets that someone doesn't get rejected because they tweeted "Trump is a jerk and I think he should be in jail"?

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by Etcetera ( 14711 )

      Most immigrants are a) fleeing from a very grim situation, b) paid a LOT of money to get here, or c) physically risked their lives and basically ran a triathlon to make it here. The last thing theyre gonna do is utterly blow it by picking up a criminal record or talking sh&t. The vast majority of immigrants keep their heads down and are VERY law abiding. Crime rates among immigrants are much lower than citizens. Despite what you hear on right wing media.

      You're being a bit cagey and loose with the term "immigrant" there. This covers everything from business owners to border crossers to student visa overstays to anyone else.

      And yes, it's entirely reasonable for USCIS to do due diligence before giving someone the privilege of permanent residency, and certainly before becoming a US Citizen. If they came in in 2013 or 2017 and post heavily in support of Hamas on Twitter and Facebook, there's no particular reason the US *has* to provide them citizenship. And, in

      • If they came in in 2013 or 2017 and post heavily in support of Hamas on Twitter and Facebook, there's no particular reason the US *has* to provide them citizenship.

        None of them are doing that. The person who has "posted" most heavily in support of Hamas is Netanyahu. He made sure they got foreign funding in the "post" so that he would have an excuse for genocide [wikipedia.org]. What is it with you cucks who refuse to believe dictators when they describe their own evil deeds?

        • They may not be doing that but I know one illegal South African immigrant who is incessantly Nazi posting and throwing sieg heils. Doesn’t sound like a good idea to let that kind of immigrant in.
    • Very law abiding with one exception.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by RobinH ( 124750 )
      The left won't have gained back credibility until they start appreciating the difference between a legal immigrant and an illegal one. If they won't acknowledge the general consensus among the vast majority of the population that illegal immigrants need to leave, then there's no point even having a discussion. They also need to acknowledge that the main group in society that's in favor of illegal immigrants staying are businesses because it pushes down wages, and businesses have long had their fingers in

      • Or maybe you MAGAts should tell the truth about your real agenda.

        For those of you with any interest in the truth; illegal immigrants are merely their first step. There's a little-known and seldom-used thing called denaturalization [google.com] that they are planning to use in a purge of fully-legal and documented immigrants as well. And dear leader and his minions, supplicants, supporters, and enablers have been announcing their plans for years.

        So yeah, RobinH, you and yours can fuck right off with your "BuT We'Re oN

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by RobinH ( 124750 )
          You're an idiot. I'm Canadian. We're a nation of immigrants and until this year we had the highest level of immigration in the G7, and Canadians are supportive of immigration as long as it's at sustainable levels. But even we don't think illegal immigration is acceptable. The democratic party in the US wilfully ignored the problem of illegal immigration in the US for far too long, and yet they supposedly represented the working class, who are directly impacted by illegal immigration because those people

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by quantaman ( 517394 )

        Neither US party favours illegal immigrants coming in, the problem is what to do once they've been there a while.

        Consider someone who has been in the US for more than 10 years, has been steadily employed, broke no laws, is popular in the community, and is in a long term relationship with an American and has two children with them.

        Is that the person you want to kick out?

        In fact, that describes my Uncle's situation almost perfectly. He married an American, had two children who were US citizens, and a career i

      • Nice straw man you have there.

    • The only crime statistics I've ever found have been about violent crime. Who cares about infrequent violent crimes? It's more about the petty stuff that affects everyone, constantly. That's why you and I locked our cars this morning. This is the kind of stuff desperately poor people might engage in and is only recorded if the perpetrators actually get caught. Further, I'd bet that, post-arrest, no one bothers to investigate a perp's recent immigration history.

    • > blow it by picking up a criminal record

      They might - as you describe, they have nothing. If someone's offering you a solution to whatever problem you have, but all you have to do is <something illegal>, sometimes you're going to do it, or else watch your child starve to death or whatever desperate situation you find yourself in.

      Some days I think the best way to get better immigrants is to offer them a clean, safe way in. You know, form an orderly queue and we'll get to you as quickly as we can. At

    • You are just a bit off. More like A) fleeing from a very grim situation that the US directly or indirectly caused by meddling in the political affairs of foreign countries.

  • Subversion (Score:3, Interesting)

    by larryjoe ( 135075 ) on Friday March 07, 2025 @12:08AM (#65216985)

    Hmm, subversion is in the eye of the beholder. I would think many Americans would consider storming the Capitol on January 6 to be an act of subversion and accordingly any social media praising that event would likewise be support for subversion. Of course, the current administration doesn't see it that way, so subversion and crime are very much in the eye of the beholder.

    Unfortunately, the current administration views subversion and efficiency differently than many Americans, instead seeing those concepts as means to punish adversaries, critics, and "undesirables." Xi Jinping used the term "corruption" in his fight to purge his competitors and perceived enemies and to solidify his power. Trump is doing the same thing, but with different terms.

  • And let the hunger games begin!

  • ... the policing of actual citizens on social media, which was rampant and open 3-5 years ago.

    (And, of course, the UK's policing of theirs now.)

  • If there were a review of Donald's social media postings rife with unhinged nonsense would he be allowed into the country?

  • Here's a nice story I feel I need to share. Back in the 80s when the Soviet Union was around, the US would perform deep background checks for anyone who wanted to immigrate to the US. I know for a fact that even a 3rd degree connection to anything 'communist' would disqualify you. I don't how I feel about the fact that up until recently we were letting people in with zero vetting, maybe even negative vetting since some folk didn't even have papers proving their identity. To me, that's the pendulum swinging

Slashdot Top Deals

"Don't think; let the machine do it for you!" -- E. C. Berkeley

Close