The Trump administration has revived a McCarthy-era law to target international students and protesters, sparking concerns about free speech and academic freedom. The administration has confirmed that it is using a provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to deport individuals deemed to be a threat to national security or foreign policy interests.

The INA provision, which dates back to the 1950s, allows the secretary of state to declare any non-citizen "deportable" if they are deemed to be a threat to national security or foreign policy interests. The provision was originally intended to root out "subversives" from every area of public life during the Cold War era.

In a recent case, Mahmoud Khalil, a recent Columbia graduate, was arrested and detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents after being accused of organizing protests and distributing pro-Hamas propaganda. The White House has confirmed that Khalil's arrest was personally ordered by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who cited the INA provision as justification.

However, experts argue that the administration's use of the INA provision is a clear overreach of power and a threat to free speech and academic freedom. The provision is often used to prevent certain individuals from entering the US, but it is rarely used to deport individuals who are already in the country. "It's using immigration policy as foreign policy," said Matt Cameron, a Boston-based immigration attorney. "The deportability provision is very concerning, because it only requires a letter from the secretary of state, and you could potentially upend somebody's life, after many, many years here, who has strong ties to the country."

The administration's use of the INA provision has sparked concerns about the impact on international students and academic freedom. "This is a clear attempt to silence dissent and stifle free speech," said a spokesperson for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). "The administration is using a McCarthy-era law to target individuals who are exercising their constitutional rights."

The case has also raised concerns about the due process rights of individuals targeted by the administration. While Khalil is entitled to a legal process, including a hearing before an immigration judge, the administration's use of the INA provision raises questions about the fairness and transparency of the process.

The administration's actions have sparked outrage among civil liberties groups and academic organizations, who argue that the use of the INA provision is a clear abuse of power. "This is a dangerous precedent that threatens the very foundations of our democracy," said a spokesperson for the National Association of University Professors. "We call on the administration to immediately cease its use of this McCarthy-era law and to respect the rights of all individuals, regardless of their nationality or political beliefs."

The case is ongoing, with Khalil's legal team arguing that his detention is unlawful and that he is entitled to release. The outcome of the case will have significant implications for international students, protesters, and anyone who exercises their constitutional rights.