Rubio's Passport Power Play: "Thought Police" Bill Sparks Liberty Alarm

Rubio's "Thought Police" Bill Sparks Alarm Among Civil Liberties Advocates A proposed bill that would grant Secretary of State Marco Rubio the power to revoke U.S. passports based on an individual's thoughts or opinions has sent shockwaves through civil liberties circles, with critics warning it could be used to silence dissenting voices. The legislation, introduced by Rep. Brian Mast, R-Fla., as part of a larger State Department reorganization, is set for a hearing Wednesday. According to the bill, Rubio would have the authority to designate individuals as "terrorist supporters" based on their thoughts or opinions, effectively revoking their passports and restricting their right to travel. Critics argue that this provision could be used to target American citizens who express dissenting views or engage in protected speech. The bill's sponsor, Rep. Mast, claims it aims to combat terrorism and trafficking, but opponents say it would open the door to a "thought police" regime. "This is a clear threat to freedom of expression and association," said Seth Stern, director of advocacy at Freedom of the Press Foundation. "If this bill passes, Rubio will have the power to revoke passports based on an individual's thoughts or opinions, which could be used to silence critics of U.S. foreign policy." Rubio has previously claimed the authority to designate individuals as terrorist supporters based solely on their thoughts, sparking concerns about his interpretation of the law. In March, Rubio stripped Turkish doctoral student Rümeysa Öztürks of her visa after she published an opinion piece critical of Israel. A court later found that the decision was based on nothing more than her protected speech. The proposed bill has sparked widespread criticism from civil liberties advocates, who warn it would undermine fundamental rights and freedoms. "This is a slippery slope," said Stern. "If we allow the government to revoke passports based on an individual's thoughts or opinions, where do we draw the line? It's a threat to our democracy and our way of life." The State Department declined to comment on the pending legislation. The bill's hearing is scheduled for Wednesday, with opponents urging lawmakers to reject the provision and protect American citizens' fundamental rights. Background: The proposed bill would grant Rubio the power to revoke U.S. passports based on an individual's thoughts or opinions. Critics argue it could be used to target American citizens who express dissenting views or engage in protected speech. Rep. Mast claims the provision aims to combat terrorism and trafficking, but opponents say it would open the door to a "thought police" regime. Additional Perspectives: The bill's sponsor, Rep. Mast, has defended the provision as necessary to combat terrorism and trafficking. Rubio has claimed the authority to designate individuals as terrorist supporters based solely on their thoughts, sparking concerns about his interpretation of the law. Current Status and Next Developments: The bill is set for a hearing Wednesday, with opponents urging lawmakers to reject the provision and protect American citizens' fundamental rights. Critics are calling on lawmakers to reject the provision and ensure that U.S. passports can only be revoked based on concrete evidence of wrongdoing, not an individual's thoughts or opinions. *Reporting by Theintercept.*