Is it really wise to let anyone into your home without any conditions? Most would say no. I mean, if a guest were to, say, act violently or create chaos, that’s a clear line. Why should we feel obligated to accept people who don’t value the country or its ideals? A visa should be viewed as a privilege rather than a fundamental right.
Additionally, those visiting, studying, or working in the U.S. don’t have the same rights compared to citizens, and their nature rights are also restricted. The rights and responsibilities of being a U.S. citizen should be held to a higher standard and not given away lightly.
There’s a big push with a GOP bill aimed at banning and deporting visa holders who support Hamas. This comes amid the rise in anti-Semitic incidents across the country. I served as the U.S. Foreign Secretary for over two decades, and during my initial stint at the embassy in New Delhi, our officers would conduct around 150 interviews daily. We used a pretty basic two-page paper form to check applicants against crime and terrorist databases, which weren’t as advanced as today’s systems. If there was a tech failure, I had to depend on outdated data.
On that fateful day of September 11, 2001, the hijackers were in the U.S. on non-immigrant visas. Many of them had tourist or visitor visas, but at least one held a student visa. The landscape was far more perilous back then, prompting the U.S. to rethink how we assessed foreign visitors. A detailed 9/11 committee report highlighted inefficiencies in our intelligence-gathering methods. The National Security Agency worked closely with the State Department to verify applicants’ details prior to issuing visas.
In our response, the State Department initiated a new form to collect additional information from each applicant. This was to ensure we had a clearer picture of who was seeking entry into our country. We enhanced our information-sharing protocols among various government branches to paint a more comprehensive view of each potential visitor.
The process initially caused a backlog, but over time, efficiency improved. Nowadays, the entire application is handled online, and the information submitted gets paired with personal images and fingerprints.
Given that today’s youth are almost all online, it makes sense that student applicants, who often have smartphones and maybe multiple social media accounts, can reflect their true selves through their posts. Anonymity is somewhat of a myth now; one should really think twice about what they choose to share publicly.
Consulate officers often encounter applicants who might lie during interviews. They are after one thing: a visa to enter the U.S. While honesty might matter in some contexts, deceiving foreign officials often feels less consequential.
Considering this reality—and the vast information online that can accurately represent individuals—it would be beneficial for consulate officers to pre-screen applicants’ social media. Unfortunately, accessing and reviewing each applicant’s numerous accounts isn’t feasible without just cause. The U.S. Embassy has a fraud prevention unit, but there simply aren’t enough resources to oversee every case.
With advancements in AI, there’s potential for better social media screening and broader applicant evaluations. Students tend to stay in the U.S. longer than tourists do, so prioritizing the vetting of students seems reasonable. Many will pursue bachelor’s degrees, obtain jobs, and some may even become citizens in the future.
If executed properly, social media reviews during the visa process should not delay it excessively. We would likely filter out those with insincere intentions before they ever arrive. However, those posting inflammatory content—like violence or anti-American rhetoric—would probably not be ideal candidates for studying or living here. I’ve seen some concerning posts by individuals wanting student visas, and to be honest, I wouldn’t want some of them to enter the country.
Take the case of Momodou Taal, who spent much of his time protesting at Cornell University. His actions there drew considerable attention. In 2024, he expressed that his inspirations came from radical sources rather than academic ones. The university’s inaction might stem from a reluctance to see him deported.
Our universities, despite defending those who may not align with Western values, still need to uphold national interests when issuing visas. Tar’s social media history might have raised flags that prevented his admission, potentially saving him from needing to pursue a questionable academic path.
We’ve already seen some troubling cases, like that of several foreign students who, while on visas, were implicated in scams targeting elderly Americans. What does their social media reveal about their intentions?
I’m particularly watching the situation involving Chinese students, who sometimes draw suspicion due to various factors, including possible smuggling operations. With over a million foreign students currently in the U.S. and nearly half a million visas being issued annually, it is essential to weed out those with ulterior motives while encouraging genuine scholars who respect American laws.
