U.S. Threatens to Bar Foreigners Over Remarks About Charlie Kirk

There is a new test for foreigners who want to enter the United States: What have they said about Charlie Kirk?

In the two weeks since Mr. Kirk was killed, U.S. officials said they have been searching for public comments celebrating or joking about his death, calling on the public to help. The penalty, officials say, is losing the right to enter the United States.

As a result, dozens of people appear to be in line to be barred from the country, including a Brazilian congressman, Mexican political commentators and a South African journalist, according to online posts from a State Department official.

“If you are here on a visa and cheering on the public assassination of a political figure, prepare to be deported,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio said last week. “You are not welcome in this country.”

The search is part of the Trump administration’s broader campaign of retribution against anyone perceived to have trivialized, condoned or wrongly cast blame in Mr. Kirk’s murder. Most prominently, Disney temporarily pulled Jimmy Kimmel’s show amid conservative criticism of his comments about the shooting.

But the search also represents another striking case in which the administration appears to be using ideology as a litmus test for which foreigners can visit, work and live in the United States.

“This is highly unusual,” said Ricardo Zúñiga, a former senior State Department official who served under five presidents, including Mr. Trump. “Would the same rules apply to someone who ridiculed attacks on opponents of the administration?”

U.S. officials typically focus on whether a visa applicant is dangerous, he said, but under Mr. Trump they have also scrutinized what people say online.

In January, Mr. Trump barred foreigners who might be hostile toward American “citizens, culture, government, institutions or founding principles.” In March, Mr. Rubio ordered his staff to inspect some student visa applicants’ online posts for antisemitism. In June, the State Department required many applicants to make their social media content public. And in July, an official testified that online criticism of the war in Gaza could weigh against applicants.

“They’re trying to reset the boundaries on what is permissible speech,” said Mr. Zúñiga. “It’s part of the message they’re sending: They want people who are ideologically aligned to be the ones traveling to the United States.”

Tommy Pigott, a State Department spokesman, in a statement called the policies “common sense” and “an essential component of our national security.” Do those opposing them “want antisemitism in the United States?” he added. “Do they want foreign aliens actively advocating for harm to Americans and the demise of the United States in our country?”

A 1952 law barred members of Communist parties from immigrating to the United States. But in 2020, the State Department clarified that there were many exceptions and that it did not apply to people just visiting.

The search for foreign critics of Mr. Kirk has been led by Christopher Landau, the State Department’s No. 2 official and a former ambassador to Mexico. The day after Mr. Kirk was killed, Mr. Landau asked his followers on X to send him examples of people “praising, rationalizing, or making light of the event.”

In more than 50 cases, Mr. Landau has responded with images styling himself as a superhero: “El Quitavisas,” or “The Visa Yanker” in Spanish. One image shows a bat signal with the U.S. government seal. Another shows a cartoon version of Mr. Landau melting a visa with lasers from his eyes.

It is not clear how many of the people cited in his posts have had their visas revoked — or even had visas to begin with.

In one clip, Jorge Roberto Avilés, a prominent Mexican commentator known as Callo de Hacha, said Mr. Kirk had “the same message as Hitler.” Mr. Landau responded with a “Quitavisas” image, adding, “How disgusting it is to justify the murder of a person who thinks differently simply by calling him Hitler.”

In another case, Redi Tlhabi, a South African journalist, wrote that she had empathy for Mr. Kirk’s family but not for Mr. Kirk because “he believed gun-related deaths were acceptable and a small price to pay for gun ownerships.” Mr. Landau responded with a Quitavisas image.

Ms. Tlhabi and Mr. Avilés did not respond to requests for comment.

Some targets of Mr. Landau’s attention quickly asked for forgiveness.

Salvador Ramírez, an official with Mexico’s dominant political party, said on a panel that Mr. Kirk had gotten “a taste of his own medicine” because of his pro-gun stance. Mr. Landau replied by saying he regretted ever speaking with the news outlet that hosted the panel when he was ambassador to Mexico.

Mr. Ramírez quickly posted an apology.

“I also want to mention that I recognize the great work that Christopher Landau did as the former U.S. ambassador,” he added. “I believe he is also doing a good job at the U.S. State Department.”