State Department revokes 6 visas over posts 'celebrating' Charlie Kirk death: ‘No longer welcome’

WASHINGTON, DC: The State Department on Tuesday, October 14, announced that it had revoked US visas belonging to six foreign nationals who "celebrated" the murder of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

In a statement shared on X (formerly Twitter), the department said, “The United States has no obligation to host foreigners who wish death on Americans.”

The official post included a thread highlighting six examples of such remarks, each ending with the phrase “Visa revoked.”

The thread included screenshots and quotes from individuals identified as foreign nationals of Argentina, Brazil, Germany, Mexico, Paraguay, and South Africa. They also made it clear that "aliens no longer welcome" to the country.

The move also signals the administration’s broader effort to extend immigration enforcement to online conduct deemed hostile or threatening.

State Department cites examples of offensive posts about Charlie Kirk

The Department of State said it will not tolerate any degrading and demeaning statement against Charlie Kirk.

On X, the department mentioned, “The United States has no obligation to host foreigners who wish death on Americans.” It added, “The State Department continues to identify visa holders who celebrated the heinous murder of Charlie Kirk. Here are just a few examples of aliens who are no longer welcome in the US.”

The post included a thread naming examples of such online remarks, each followed by the phrase “Visa revoked.” According to the department, the individuals involved were citizens of Argentina, Brazil, Germany, Mexico, Paraguay, and South Africa.

Some of the comments labeled Kirk a “r*cist” and mocked Americans grieving his death, while others used even stronger language. The department said the visa cancellations were part of its duty to protect Americans and uphold national values.

The Department of State also shared another post, saying, "@POTUS and @SecRubio will defend our borders, our culture, and our citizens by enforcing our immigration laws. Aliens who take advantage of America’s hospitality while celebrating the assassination of our citizens will be removed."

The six posts that got foreign nationals their visas revoked 

The agency noted that the Trump administration will take action against those celebrating Charlie Kirk’s death. They shared six screenshots. The first one is “An Argentine national said that Kirk ‘devoted his entire life spreading racist, xenophobic, misogynistic rhetoric’ and deserves to burn in hell. Visa revoked.”

The second said, “A South African national mocked Americans grieving the loss of Kirk, saying ‘they’re hurt that the racist rally ended in attempted martyrdom’ and alleging ‘he was used to astroturf a movement of white nationalist trailer trash.’ Visa revoked."

The third post is from a Mexican national, “A Mexican national said that Kirk ‘died being a racist, he died being a misogynist’ and stated that ‘there are people who deserve to die. There are people who would make the world better off dead.’ Visa revoked.”

The fourth one post is from a Brazilian nationality, “A Brazilian national charged that ‘Charlie Kirk was the reason for a Nazi rally where they marched in homage to him’ and that Kirk ‘DIED TOO LATE.’ Visa revoked.”

The fifth post said, “A German national celebrated Kirk’s death and attempted to justify his murder, writing ‘when fascists die, democrats don’t complain.’ Visa revoked."

“A Paraguayan national charged that ‘Charlie Kirk was a son of a b*** and he died by his own rules.’ Visa revoked.”

Legal experts question State Department's visa revocation

Legal experts have questioned the Trump administration’s decision to revoke visas over comments about Charlie Kirk’s death as it could violate the First Amendment.

Harold Hongju Koh, who served as the State Department’s legal adviser during the Barack Obama administration, said revoking visas based on statements about Kirk’s death is basically “a First Amendment violation.”

“It shouldn’t matter whether you agree with what they say or not, but the idea that they lose their visa over this is essentially violating the first premise of US Supreme Court First Amendment law,” Koh told CNN.

He also criticized the decision to revoke visas and questioned what scale would be used and who would decide when they are applied.

Koh said, “It’s a punitive exercise of the president’s diplomatic powers, and what are the limits to this? What if they decide next that criticizing the president is the basis for engaging in visa denials?"

“I don’t know any lawyer who was in L (Office of the Legal Adviser) in my time who would have signed off on this,” he added.

Not just Koh, even Scott Anderson, a former attorney-adviser at the State Department, said that there could be a legal distinction between revoking visas and denying them.

"Foreign citizens, once they’re lawfully situated in the US, usually have a fair amount of First Amendment rights,” he voiced his opinion.

“It gets trickier when you’re talking about people overseas coming to the United States or here on more discretionary visas, and exactly where the limits are on that,” said Anderson.

“People overseas don’t have any entitlement to come to the United States. There’s certainly no constitutional rights.”

This article contains remarks made on the internet by individual people and organizations. MEAWW cannot confirm them independently and does not support claims or opinions being made online