USCIS said the vetting of social media accounts is necessary for “the enhanced identity verification, vetting and national security screening.” Critics say it crushes free speech

Summary:

The Trump administration’s proposal to vet social media profiles of green card applicants already legally in the U.S. has been condemned in initial public feedback as an attack on free speech.

Visa applicants living abroad already have to share their social media handles with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, but the proposal under President Donald Trump would expand the policy to those already legally in the country who are applying for permanent residency or seeking asylum.

USCIS said the vetting of social media accounts is necessary for “the enhanced identity verification, vetting and national security screening.”

The agency also said it was necessary to comply with Trump’s executive order titled “Protecting the United States from Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats.”

“In a review of information collected for admission and benefit decisions, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) identified the need to collect social media identifiers (‘handles’) and associated social media platform names from applicants to enable and help inform identity verification, national security and public safety screening, and vetting, and related inspections,” the agency announced on March 5.

President Donald Trump’s administration has proposed vetting the social media handles of immigrants already legally in the U.S. who are applying for green cards or permanent citizenship. The plan has been condemned as a ‘violation of the First Amendment.’

  • Coreidan@lemmy.worldEnglish
    11·
    12 days ago

    They don’t need to be 100%.

    We didn’t have a measles problem in this county until the fucking morons stopped vaccinating.

    Even if you some how manage to get the virus after getting the vaccine your body is better equipped to deal with the virus by a significant factor.

    There is absolutely zero reason to not get vaccinated. Stop being dumb.

    • GreyBeard@lemmy.one
      4·
      12 days ago

      Nobody in this thread suggested not getting the vaccine. Entire problem is that we are dropping below herd immunity thresholds and that means worse outcomes for the vaccinated and unvaccinatable alike.

      • Coreidan@lemmy.worldEnglish
        12·
        12 days ago

        And if you get vaccinated it becomes virtually a nonissue with or without herd immunity.

        Unless of course you just don’t believe in science.

        • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2·
          12 days ago

          virtually a nonissue

          Emphasis on virtually. It’s not 100%. That’s why there is talk about herd immunity. I don’t think anyone here is proposing to not get vaccinated or that they don’t accept the science [1].

          https://theconversation.com/if-my-measles-shot-was-years-ago-am-i-still-protected-5-questions-answered-115691

          One dose of the MMR vaccine protects against measles at 93% efficacy (that is, 93% of individuals will receive the protective benefit of the vaccine), two doses of the vaccine provides 96-97% efficacy.

          [1] I much prefer this phrasing than saying someone “believes” in science, since science does not require belief.

          • futatorius@lemm.ee
            1·
            12 days ago

            I believe (not believe in) science because I can check the steps myself if I’m so inclined. In my field, I often do, it’s not just a “could but never do” situation.