← Back to context

Comment by hvb2

4 hours ago

> The terms were clear, visas are a privilege and not a right or automatic entitlement.

They are. Yet can you tell me why you would need to pause all processing in order to retrain your people? Surely they do training all the time without pausing processing.

Your passport is a right too, you wouldn't mind if they paused that request with no indication of when they might resume? And that's including when you're abroad and lost yours. If that happens to you, you'll happily hold the same position?

> They are.

United States Code plainly disagrees with you, as do the laws of basically every developed nation in the world. Visas are not a right, by definition.

> Your passport is a right too,

I am a citizen, so this isn't a good faith comparison. Citizens naturally have higher priority than visitors, otherwise what's the purpose of citizenship as a concept at all?

  • I meant that I agreed that visas are a right.

    > I am a citizen, so this isn't a good faith comparison.

    Oh, you still are. You'll get your passport, we just can't tell you when. That's what's happening here. These people aren't being denied, they're told to wait for an indefinite amount of time.

    But basically you're saying that you think this is outrageous if it were you, got it.

    • > I meant that I agreed that visas are a right.

      I've explicitly stated that visas are not a right - which is the legally-consistent opinion and basic English interpretation of the concept. (If visas were a right, why would denial be a possibility? If denial isn't a possibility, what function do they serve?)

      > That's what's happening here. These people aren't being denied, they're told to wait for an indefinite amount of time.

      What part of "these people" somehow makes them equivalent in entitlement to a nation's citizens - how is this even a question? Not agreeing that borders, citizenship are concepts generally doesn't make them magically cease to exist.