US revokes visas from six foreign nationals for social media comments critical of Charlie Kirk — as it happened
US revokes visas from six foreign nationals for social media comments critical of Charlie Kirk — as it happened

🇺🇸 Overview
The U.S. State Department has announced that it revoked the visas of six foreign nationals after identifying social media posts in which they allegedly celebrated or made light of the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. CBS News+3Reuters+3The Guardian+3
The decision comes amid an intensified posture by the Trump administration toward foreign individuals whose online speech it views as hostile or threatening toward Americans. CBS News+3TIME+3Axios+3
This move followed public warnings by senior U.S. officials, and coincided with President Trump posthumously awarding Kirk the Presidential Medal of Freedom. The Guardian+5AP News+5Reuters+5
📋 Details of the Revocations
Who and Where
- The six individuals involved are from Argentina, Brazil, Germany, Mexico, Paraguay, and South Africa. Fox News+4Reuters+4The Guardian+4
- Their specific visa categories, whether they were in the U.S. at the time, or how long their visas had been valid were not disclosed. Axios+3CBS News+3Reuters+3
- The State Department did not name the individuals; instead, it published anonymized screenshots of their posts, indicating their nationalities. ABC7 Los Angeles+3TIME+3The Guardian+3
What Was Said (Allegedly)
The State Department cited the social media comments as evidence that these individuals “celebrated the heinous assassination” of Kirk. CBS News+3Axios+3Reuters+3
Examples mentioned include:
- An Argentine user accusing Kirk of “spreading racist, xenophobic, misogynistic rhetoric” and saying he deserved to “burn in hell.” Reuters+2Fox News+2
- A German national reportedly posting, “when fascists die, democrats don’t complain.” Reuters+2TIME+2
- A Brazilian commenter saying Kirk “DIED TOO LATE.” Fox News+2TIME+2
- A South African citizen referenced “white nationalist trailer trash” in a post criticizing Kirk’s supporters. The Washington Post+2CBS News+2
- A Paraguayan user’s comment was quoted as: “Charlie Kirk was a son of a b — and he died by his own rules.” Fox News+2TIME+2
- A Mexican national stated, “there are people who deserve to die… there are people who would make the world better off dead.” TIME+2Fox News+2
Each excerpt in the State Department’s X thread ended with the note: “Visa revoked.” Fox News+2Reuters+2
The Department’s message on X concluded:
“The United States has no obligation to host foreigners who wish death on Americans.” TIME+3Reuters+3Axios+3
It also said it continues to identify other visa-holders who published similar celebratory remarks. CBS News+3Axios+3Reuters+3
🔎 Context & Background
Prior Warnings & Policy Shift
- Days after Kirk’s assassination, Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau posted on X that he was “disgusted” by praise or rationalizations of the event and directed consular officials to take “appropriate action.” Axios+4Newsweek+4The Guardian+4
- Secretary of State Marco Rubio reaffirmed that those celebrating Kirk’s murder would face visa denial or revocation. He said:
- “If you’re a foreigner… celebrating the assassination of someone … we don’t want you in the country.” CBS News+3mint+3KCRA+3
- The move aligns with broader policy in the current administration that exams an applicant or visa-holder’s social media footprint, particularly for statements deemed “anti-American” or promoting violence. TIME+3WFTV+3The Guardian+3
Domestic Repercussions & Speech Debate
- The fallout from Kirk’s death triggered a wave of disciplinary actions: more than 145 people have reportedly been fired, suspended, or resigned over social media comments or posts related to Kirk. Al Jazeera+2TIME+2
- The move to revoke visas based on speech has stoked immediate criticism from civil rights advocates and legal experts, who argue the actions may violate free speech principles. The Guardian+3TIME+3The Washington Post+3
- Some commentators point out that non-citizens lawfully present in the U.S. do enjoy certain First Amendment protections, complicating the legal defensibility of such visa revocations. The Guardian+3TIME+3The Washington Post+3
Comments
Post a Comment