I’m sorry, that’s wrong. That should be “Trump Celebrates Immigration Arrest of Columbia Student, Vows to Target Others.”

We regret the error.

That headline is from the Washington Post story covering Mahmoud Khalil’s “arrest” (a word meant to lend a veneer of legality):

Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia, called Khalil’s arrest “genuinely shocking.”

“Arresting and threatening to deport students because of their participation in political protest is the kind of action one ordinarily associates with the world’s most repressive regimes,” he said. “Universities must recognize that these actions pose an existential threat to academic life itself. They must make clear, through action, that they will not sit on the sidelines as the Trump administration terrorizes students and faculty alike and runs roughshod over individual rights and the rule of law.”

Repressive regimes is overly polite. Brutal dictatorships seems more accurate.

Let me be clear: Regardless of your “politics”—whether you agree or disagree with what Mahmoud Khalil was protesting—detaining, arresting, and disappearing a legal American resident is a violation of due process and the First Amendment. It is an act of aggression against this country and its citizens (and legal residents), and it won’t stop with just Khalil, nor with people who engage in, as Trump sees it, “pro-terrorist, anti-Semitic, anti-American activity.”

The regime’s justification for this chilling action is based on a broad interpretation of the law:

The administration did not publicly lay out the legal authority for the arrest. But two people with knowledge of the matter, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive internal deliberations, said Secretary of State Marco Rubio relied on a provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act that gives him sweeping power to expel foreigners.

The provision says any "alien whose presence or activities in the United States the Secretary of State has reasonable ground to believe would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States is deportable."

Taken to its extreme—and no, Khalil’s snatching is not yet the extreme—the Trump regime could use this interpretation to detain and expel any green card or visa holder. You disagree with Trump’s threats to invade Canada, Greenland, or Panama, his Ukraine policies, or simply enjoy mocking him? That’s a serious adverse foreign policy consequence for the United States. Begone.

That’s not even the end of it. Even naturalized citizens (hi!) can have their citizenship revoked. One reason your citizenship can be revoked?

[…] if the U.S. government can prove that you joined a subversive organization within five years of becoming a naturalized citizen. Subversive organizations are groups deemed to be threats to U.S. national security. Examples include the Nazi Party and Al Qaeda.

Guess who gets to determine what a “subversive organization” is? How long before the Democratic Party itself is deemed “subversive”? There is supposed to be due process, of course, but due process is clearly not much of a deterrent for this regime.

First undocumented immigrants.

Then green card holders.

Then birthright citizens.

Then naturalized citizens.

Then you.