The U.S. government, in its zealous enforcement of the nation’s immigration laws, has become lawless, writes Andrew P. Napolitano.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem observing immigration enforcement operations in New York City in late January. (DHS / Flickr/ Tia Dufour)
“First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out —
Because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out —
Because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out —
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me — and there was no one left to speak for me.”
— Rev. Martin Niemoller (1892-1984)
The history of human freedom is long, tortuous and not gratifying.
It consists essentially in governments trampling the laws enacted to restrain them. It is the profound clash of natural personal freedom and the commands of the state backed by force.
The constitutions of totalitarian countries are papered over with restraints on the state, but the restraints are toothless. The state does what it wants. It doesn’t take rights seriously.
In liberal democracies — with the separation of powers, and checks and balances — the state is theoretically restrained. Yet often, there, too, the restraints are paper tigers. There, too, HERE, too, the state does not take rights seriously.
Thomas Jefferson argued that in the long march of history, personal liberty shrinks and state power grows. He famously believed that only a revolution can bring about a proper reset.
All of this history and theory came into sharp focus in the past two weeks when the feds arrested an Algerian graduate student in his student housing at Columbia University in New York City and shipped him to an immigration jail in Louisiana. He is married to a native-born American, they are expecting a child in April and he is a permanent resident alien.
Last week, the federal government arrested a Lebanese physician at Logan Airport in Boston. She is a professor of medicine at Brown University, and she, too, is a permanent resident alien.
The student was charged with immigration violations. The physician was summarily deported to Paris and then to her native Lebanon.
The charging documents filed against the student allege no crime or personal misbehavior, point to no statutory violations and offer no evidence of the student’s danger to persons or property or the government.
The papers claim that U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio believes that this student’s presence on the Columbia campus — given his outspoken support for a Palestinian state, the existence of which has been the public policy of the U.S. for generations — is a material impediment to the execution of American foreign policy.
There are no charging papers filed against the physician, but the government leaked that when federal agents seized her mobile phone, they determined that she had been at the funeral of Hassan Nasrallah, the recently murdered head of Hezbollah. She was there along with hundreds of thousands, possibly more than a million, others.

Nasrallah’s funeral in Beirut on Feb. 23. (Khamenei.ir, Wikimedia Commons, CC BY 4.0)
When asked about this, according to the government leakers, she stated that she followed Nasrallah’s religious teachings but not his political ones.
While the physician was confined at Logan, her attorneys obtained an order from a federal judge prohibiting her deportation until a hearing could be held before him. The government ignored the order.
Numerous Rights Implicated
These two arrests implicate numerous constitutionally guaranteed rights, which are generally taken for granted here.
The first is the freedom of speech. We know from the writings of James Madison — who authored the Bill of Rights — that the Founders regarded the freedom of speech as a personal individual natural right. It is also, of course, expressly protected from government interference and reprisal in the First Amendment.
The courts have ruled that it protects all persons — no matter their immigration status — who may think as they wish, say what they think, publish what they say, worship or not and associate with whomever they choose.
If the government can punish the speech it or its friends and benefactors hate and fear, then the First Amendment is useless and democracy is a sham.
Also implicated in these arrests is freedom of religion and assembly. Just as the student can make any public political statement he wishes — no matter how offensive or provocative it may be to his immediate or a distant audience — the physician can attend any funeral she wishes, can associate with any mourners of her choosing, can embrace any religion and can follow any preacher.
The whole purpose of the First Amendment is to keep the government out of the business of speech, religion and assembly. Without government fidelity to it, America is no longer a democracy but rather some form of conformist secular theocracy that rejects the basic values protected by the Constitution — and changes with every election.
Also implicated by these arrests is due process, guaranteed to all persons by the Fifth Amendment. At its rudimentary base, due process requires a fair hearing before a neutral arbiter before the government may interfere with life, liberty or property — and at which the government must prove personal fault.
In the case of the physician, the feds shipped her to Paris before the hearing could be held. In the case of the Columbia student, the feds shipped him to Louisiana, in defiance of the constitutional requirement that all persons be tried in the judicial district — in this case, New York City — in which the facts in their case took place.
What’s going on here?
In the government’s zealous enforcement of the nation’s immigration laws, it has become lawless. Every person who works for the government has taken an oath of fidelity to the Constitution. It is obvious that the feds do not take their oaths seriously. It is also obvious that the feds are breaking the laws we have hired them to enforce.
When government becomes the lawbreaker, it becomes a law unto itself — and human freedom is trampled by brute force.
This cannot go on unchecked. For whom will the government come next?
Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, was the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel and hosts the podcast “Judging Freedom.” Judge Napolitano has written seven books on the U.S. Constitution. The most recent is Suicide Pact: The Radical Expansion of Presidential Powers and the Lethal Threat to American Liberty. To learn more about Judge Andrew Napolitano, visit here.
Published by permission of the author.
COPYRIGHT 2025 ANDREW P. NAPOLITANO
DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM
The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.
The myth of the ‘greatest nation on Earth’…boy, is it being busted.
When was America a democracy ?
The ideals of democracy have gone through a long period of testing. But the system in my opinion over time has at least provides some adjustment. The McCarthy period was an interesting recent example and the warmongering and social impositions lately in pursuit of global hegemony is not just being tested.
“This cannot go on unchecked. For whom will the government come next?” This is true, but it’s not enough to say this. “What then must we do”? That is the pressing question.
In a chess game, if the other player refuses to follow the rules of the movement of the pieces or the order of play, then the only options are to accept defeat or to knock over the board and banish the other player. These become the new rules. We seem to be moving rather quickly to that choice — but people are almost never ready for it.
I love the Judge. I watch his podcast daily. He’s a national treasure.
The Trump loyalists are all onboard with what’s going on. As usual, those who support such measures as in the poem, think they will remain unaffected. We are all in the crosshairs of the lawless.
I don’t think the loyalists are necessarily on board but rather are turning a disingenuous blind eye to those actions his administration are carrying out so long as the overall policies they want passed are dealt with during his term.
It’s a highly flawed strategy that is already showing numerous fissures.
The biggest of those is the persistent support for the Israel Lobby and Israel’s heinous criminal actions in Gaza and the West Bank. These two cases wouldn’t be cases if it wasn’t for that intransigent position. Anything he accomplishes in Ukraine is negated by his compromised position on Israeli war crimes that he’s now fully complicit in aiding ,militarily and economically. I’m Canadian and WAS a former Trump supporter in principle. No longer for obvious reasons.
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
Where do you see “US citizens” here? I only see “the people” … are you saying noncitizens are not people?
There have been Supreme Court decisions since then and Constitutional rights apply to everyone on US soil but not to non-US citizens outside the US. It’s the reason why the US was unable to extradite Julian Assange to the US. It is what saved him. Because European law which the British courts were bound to follow required that Assange be given First AMENDMENT rights but the DoJ could not give that assurance as he acted and was still outside the US.
A visa is a privilege, not a right.
If you hold a visa, you are guest, not a citizen.
As a guest, you should enjoy your host country, not try to control it’s direction.
If you wish to control, then apply for citizenship.
IMHO
He didn’t have a visa. He has a green card, or permanent residence. In any case a visa holder too in the US is protected by the First Amendment.
I appreciate Judge Napolitano pointing out the crimes of the DT2 regime, as he did with the Genocide Joe regime. The abuses of power, and institutional corruption are bipartisan and entrenched.
Pity that apologists will believe whatever they are told, while too lazy to look up basic facts. This is true with both DT supporters and the D party supporters.
Deporting legal residents based on their opposition to genocide is not only illegal, it is a betrayal of patriotic Americans who do not want their resources given away for free to a foreign country to kill women and children. It’s quite simple.
Be specific about these “crimes.” Much of this involves changes that upset the New World Order establishment attempting to impose a global hegemony.
I saw a report from south of the border about Trump/Musk/Thiel’s deportations. One of the deported was a football player. Not American football, but the game played with a round ball and the feet. He was deported for a tattoo. He had on his arm a symbol that the Border Patrol types did not recognize. He had a tattoo of the logo of the football team that wins World Championships, the logo of the football club Real Madrid.
For that crime, he was apparently on one of the flights that a judge tried to turn around but where Trump defied the judicial order to deport this dangerous gang member. You know what those football players are like!
hxxps://www.newsweek.com/deportation-flights-venezuelan-real-madrid-tattoo-tren-de-aragua-2047960
Such unfounded rhetoric! The three cited cases remain contentious and, in most instances, unresolved. To suggest that these examples alone render the country lawless is both premature and misleading
It’s always informative when those who have preached for decades that the US Constitution is out of date and irrelevant to today’s world suddenly invoke it when their political beliefs are challenged. While this does not justify ignoring the Constitution in ether direction, one should not be outraged with the pendulum swings radically in the other direction.
It is interesting to use a modern text search on the Constitution for the word “citizen.” It does appear, 22 times. It appears in the qualifications for office for elected Fed officials. It appears in the definition of the courts, as the Fed courts are restricted to disputes between states or their citizens. It appears in several of the amendments, particularly the ones approved by the American people after the Civil War. It of course says very clearly that all people born in the USA are citizens.
But, nowhere in the Constitution, written by much more revolutionary people than today’s Americans, does it say anything about establishing rights only for American citizens and that until you are naturalized as a citizen that you are some sort of right-less person.
And of course, these old revolutionaries did write the words that paraphrase in modern language as “All People are endowed with rights that can not be taken away from them, and that among these rights, but not limited to these examples, are the rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.”
Notice the “All” in the wording. The American Dream is that ALL people have such rights.
“All people are endowed with rights ….” presumably means everyone on the Earth, so as those rights are taken away ‘legally’ by the US govt. very frequently and continuing today for example, then no provision of the US Constitution is worth much so don’t bank on it.
Welcome to Libertarianism. This was always the future that it offered.
Libertarianism was always based on the idea that if we get rid of all the government controls and regulations then we can finally be free. Libertarianism believes then we can have a fair fight within the society, me versus Elon Musk, or me versus Charles Koch, in a no-rules, cage-fight. A cage fight because we at least are stuck here without the freedom of the rich and their corporate jets. Completely fair, right?
Libertarianism always led here.
If you have a government that is small enough to be drowned in a bathtub, then it can provide no protection to citizens and thus no Safety and Happiness. Except of course to the very rich.
You mean Right Wing libertarian. Political terms are loaded and have various meanings, working definitions are important. There is also Left Wing libertarian (Noam Chomsky labels himself as “anarcho-socialist”, for example)
The Political Compass website does a great job of explaining these terms and issues.
IMO, the right wing so-called libertarians espouse pure hypocrisy: “freedom for me, but not for thee”
Judge Napolitano,
You are the best!
Wrong Andrew. These rights and protections only apply to US Citizens
Wrong Me. Foreign nationals on US soil have the same constitutional protections as US citizens.
hxxps://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S8-C18-8-7-2/ALDE_00001262/
hxxps://www.npr.org/2025/03/11/nx-s1-5323208/what-rights-do-green-card-holders-have-in-the-u-s#:~:text=And%20it%20also%20said%20that,to%20everyone%20within%20the%20borders.
Absolutely correct! At least so far, but we are just a couple of months into the second version of the book 1984.
It appears you don’t know the Constitution, Me. Contact your federal representative and they will send you one.
The Nuremberg trial precedents and ‘international law’ (really, at this point, norm suggesting position papers) put significant responsibility on the actors at the point of the action. There will always be sociopaths (research has established far more than in the general population) in substantial positions of power in government and business. Such people will always ignore laws and norms as they can for their advantage. When this becomes serious, as it is now here in the US and several other places around the world, we must stop saying that it is ‘the feds’ doing the deeds, stop pointing to the DOJ or the White House; the people on the ground following the orders, ICE officers, attorneys, pilots….all the machinery of action when a president, PM, general, CEO, etc. gives an order must be held responsible on the Nuremberg principle. But this has no precedent coming from the people of the affected nation, always imposed from the outside. If we are to restore constitutional principles, we must somehow find a way to do it for ourselves.