Talk:Visa and deportation controversies in the second Trump administration

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Several different titles were proposed, and none received particularly strong support. (non-admin closure) {{GearsDatapacks|talk|contribs}} 15:55, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

Visa and deportation controversies in the second Trump administration → List of activists and critics targeted in the second Trump administration – This article is too broadly defined in its current form. There is already an article about deportation (Deportation in the second Trump administration) and it's unclear, based on this article's current title, where this article ends and where that article begins. Targeting of political opponents and civil society under the second Trump administration sounds similar at face value to the new title proposal, but what this article will do is chronicle each incident with an activist/critic and what that article will do is give an overview of broader issues, e.g., investigations, compiling data on Americans, etc. The Higher Ed section in this article should be merged to Education policy of the second Trump administration. The rest of the information on this page should be kept and treated as a chronological list. We should also add non-visa-related incidents like this to the article after the move. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 13:46, 4 March 2026 (UTC) — Relisting. Jack Frost (talk) 04:07, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

• Strong oppose. The suggested change and proposed addition broadens the scope of the page way beyond the current scope, which focuses solely on non-citizens, especially attempts to deport people or limit visas based on speech that's normally protected under the First Amendment. It may be that the title and scope should change somewhat (the current title is already a move from Activist deportations in the second Trump presidency, in recognition of the fact that some of the people discussed have not been deported), but the proposed change is not the one to make. FactOrOpinion (talk) 15:22, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

  Hi, thanks for responding. I don't understand why you're assuming reorganization of the article's scope is problematic. Could you please explain? Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 17:55, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

  I'm not assuming that it's problematic per se. I'm saying that I oppose the specific change proposed. FactOrOpinion (talk) 20:47, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

  I also agree with this. Also the proposed article is less neutral. Temotskipa (talk) 23:32, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

• Support: current title sounds like an WP:NPOVFORK of Deportation in the second Trump administration. Proposed title more appropriately defines the scope of the article per WP:NDESC. Would be open to other proposals for new titles as well. Maybe List of people targeting for deportation in the second Trump administration?  Bait30  ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 21:50, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

  Not sure it's a WP:NPOVFORK but definitely agree it's duplicative. Since the article is primarily made up of activists and critics targeted by Trump, and since this is the part of the article that is not duplicative with other articles, I think List of activists and critics targeted in the second Trump administration makes the most sense. List of people targeted for deportation in the second Trump administration would mean we'd have to remove sections unrelated to deportations but still related to political oppression, like the section on Reprisals against commentators on the Charlie Kirk assassination. I think political oppression of activists as the primary focus of this article, rather than deportation, would best make this article fill an open space unoccupied by other existing articles. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 11:27, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Comment - I don't love the current title, but @FactOrOpinion's criticism of your proposed change is valid as well. Would Immigrants targeted for activism or criticism in the second Trump Administration be more accurate? Monk of Monk Hall (talk) 17:35, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Support over the current title (with a lowercase Administration).

Comment But I think restraining it to immigrants targeted for activism or criticism will leave activists and critics who are not immigrants homeless. So I still prefer the version I proposed since it has a broader scope, unless someone can show me where non-immigrant activists not notable enough for a full article but are notable enough to be put on a list article (like this) should go. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 07:17, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

@Alexandraaaacs1989 Would anyone in this article be excluded by the title change?

For the video you linked, it would be more appropriate to include it in an article about protests against the Venezuelan intervention, if it is due enough to be included there. That incident is not really linked to Trump's immigration policy at all, unlike (to my knowledge) all of the incidents in this article. Monk of Monk Hall (talk) 03:44, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

Would anyone in this article be excluded by the title change? Nope! All farmworker/union/higher ed people are critics and will stay on this article. The only parts that might be migrated elsewhere (or at least condensed into a single overview section) are the paragraph sections before the individuals about social media and higher ed.

As for the video I linked, I think it belongs if my proposal for the title not to be specific to immigrants and to be more about activists/critics gets approved. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 05:42, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

Nothing prevents you from creating an article for a group that you believe are notable and that you're worried would otherwise be "homeless," though I agree with Monk of Monk Hall that they might be more appropriately addressed in other articles.

How are you planning to bound the group of activists and critics? Trump has millions of critics, a sizeable number of whom have been targeted in various ways (e.g., consider the list of lawyers in Targeting of law firms and lawyers under the second Trump administration, the Prosecution of James Comey, the prosecution of LaMonica McIver in the Newark immigration detention center incident, Trump's targeting of Democratic politicians like Jasmine Crockett, Ilhan Omar, and Gavin Newsom). You gave an example of someone arrested for protesting. Are you planning to include all such identifiable arrests? FactOrOpinion (talk) 15:42, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

That's a good question, and you may be right that "critics" as a word is improperly broad and that the proposed title change deserves a clarification to prevent us from having to include public officials/law firms and lawyers in this article.

One avenue is we could gut the "critics" part of my proposal and include only "activists" so it says List of activists targeted in the second Trump administration, and we could still probably keep farmworker/union/higher ed people in this article even after removing "critics" since they engaged in activism in some way.

Another avenue is clarifying the scope of the article in the article lede without removing "critics" to ensure it's clear to the reader we're not talking about technocrats and politicians but rather the regular people and community organizers targeted.

Which of these sound better to you? Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 23:28, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

As I said earlier, I'm not in favor of changing the scope of this article to include citizens, so neither sound good to me. I think that if you want an article for all activists living in the US who are targeted for diverse reasons, you should create a separate article. I also don't think that writing an opinion column for a student newspaper makes the writer an activist (e.g., I'd call Khalil an activist, but not Öztürk), so if consensus is to move the article and you end up taking your first route, you're potentially talking about removing a number of people who are currently included in the article. One of the reasons that the title of the article changed from its original title (Activist deportations in the second Trump presidency) is because editors recognized that a number of the people listed might not describe themselves as activists, nor be described in RSs as activists. FactOrOpinion (talk) 00:14, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Numerous proposals were evaluated and none gained consensus. One editor or another objected to pretty much every single word choice evaluated. While I do not see a high level of support for the current title, I'm not able to piece together even a rough consensus or WP:BARTENDER title from this discussion. Note that another editor already closed this as 'no consensus' nearly a month ago. This was reverted by the nominator. A subsequent relist and additional participation failed to generate consensus. To be clear, there is no consensus for the current title nor for the variations evaluated in this discussion. (closed by non-admin page mover) —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 18:14, 23 August 2026 (UTC)

Visa and deportation controversies in the second Trump administration → Immigrants targeted for activism or criticism in the second Trump administration – The previous move proposal, List of activists and critics targeted in the second Trump administration, failed because it changed the scope of the article to be broader than targeting of immigrant activists specifically. Therefore I am making a more modest proposal that still resolves many of the scope issues based on a suggestion from Monk of Monk Hall: it's about immigrant activists and critics. The contents of the article would not change, as the contents of the article better reflect this new title proposal than the current title of the page which centers it on Visa statuses rather than the common underlying factor beneath each of these incidents: that the people targeted are specifically immigrant activists and critics, and it's WP:NOTABLE enough of a topic for us to have a page on this specifically, as evidenced by how a focus on this topic happened naturally over time as this page evolved (wisdom of the crowd). Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 21:29, 19 July 2026 (UTC) — Relisting. –Maltazarian ^{ᚾparley${\displaystyle \lor }$investigateᛅ} 11:05, 1 August 2026 (UTC) — Relisting. Axolitl (talk | contribs) 06:09, 10 August 2026 (UTC)

Pinging users from last discussion:

@FactOrOpinion

@Monk of Monk Hall

@Bait30

@Temotskipa

Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 21:34, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this up again. I do think the title needs a change, and am hopeful we can find the best title. I think yours is fine, and would Support it over the current title. However, I could be convinced to support a better one if it emerges in discussion. Monk of Monk Hall (talk) 05:13, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

• Move to something like Targeting of political dissenters for deportation by the second Trump administration or Visa revocation for political speech in the second Trump administration. Piece by piece:
  1. The main noun should be the administrative action rather than "controversies" (see WP:CSECTION) or the people targeted (not the article's focus).
  2. Adding "deportation" or "visa revocation" adds precision and avoids the need to use a potentially obscure term for members of the group (many are international students, so not "immigrants", but possibly "foreign nationals" or "visa-holders"). FactOrOpinion raised some issues with "deportation", but adding "targeting" mostly resolves them. "Targeting" also addresses tactics like selective enforcement of older orders or pretextual use of speeding tickets.
  3. I'm less sure whether it's appropriate to describe the people targeted as "critics", "dissenters", "dissidents", or "activists". I'm leaning toward "dissenter" because it's the broadest, although I'm not sure it cleanly applies to the union organizers who were also active during Dem presidencies. Instead of labeling the people, we could use "for political activity", "for political expression", "for their opinions", or "for their speech" (alluding to the First Amendment). "Speech-related" is a little less clear. "Political targeting" is a bit vague.
  4. I don't have strong opinions between "[in/by/under/during] the second Trump administration". Each variant is used in several Wikipedia article titles.

  Jruderman (talk) 04:44, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Notifying everyone else who participated in previous informal move discussions above: Bob drobbs, CaptainJZH, Eigenbra, Esolo5002, EvansHallBear, GeoEvan, Jack Frost, Lova Falk, Mason7512, Silver seren. Jruderman (talk) 05:20, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Support Targeting of political dissenters for deportation by the second Trump administration, provided that the content is thereafter maintained to conform with the scope of this phrasing. Thanks for the tag. GeoEvan (talk) 11:31, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Targeting of immigrant political dissenters by the second Trump administration is my new shortened proposal.

Monk of Monk Hall is happy with Immigrants targeted for activism or criticism in the second Trump administration which is similar, but may like this proposal more, so I'm pinging them again.

Jruderman proposed Targeting of political dissenters for deportation by the second Trump administration and GeoEvan proposed Targeting of political dissenters for deportation by the second Trump administration, but I think they are a bit too long, so I would prefer Targeting of immigrant political dissenters by the second Trump administration if we went down this route.

Targeting of immigrant political dissenters by the second Trump administration - can we create consensus for this title? Trying to put everyone's ideas together to make everyone as happy as possible with the move request. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 22:20, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

I think targeting of immigrant political dissenters is perfect. Nice work. Monk of Monk Hall (talk) 23:08, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

I'd like to avoid "immigrant" in the title because international students aren't classified as immigrants. I guess "foreign nationals" or "immigrants and international students" is a possibility, but a title that uses "targeting ... for deportation" or "visa revocation" can be shorter. Jruderman (talk) 23:10, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Jruderman, my suggestion is Targeting of foreign political dissenters by the second Trump administration.

In light of Jrude's comment, does the above "foreign" version work for you too Monk of Monk Hall? If so I presume we have consensus! Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 23:29, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

I'm fine with it, but given that the link is to the DHS website, I'm wondering whether this "nonimmigrant" status is an enduring classification or a part of the Trump administration's recent policy changes. I would intuitively think of international students as being a type of immigrant, and I only think this change is necessary if this classification has an enduring history in US government practice, or if it sticks for an enduring period of time into the future. The "foreign" label is laden with its own issues, with some of these people living much or practically all of their lives as de facto Americans, regardless of their exact legal status. The location of foreign dissidents is also unclear compared to the immigrant label, as targeting of foreign dissidents could presumably include transnational repression. Monk of Monk Hall (talk) 23:40, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

“Foreign” sounds like targeting people who are outside of the US. And on second thought, “foreign national” does too. I’d like to avoid those. Jruderman (talk) 23:48, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Yeah, that's what I'm worried about too. Unless more sources than just DHS are saying international students aren't a type of immigrant, we might be fine to use that. I don't know enough about the fine distinctions tbh. Monk of Monk Hall (talk) 23:49, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

The article Immigration and the dictionaries it cites say the term applies to moving permanently. Doesn't seem to be a recent/US thing. Jruderman (talk) 00:29, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Some people targeted like Mohen are professors, not students, so I think we should avoid "international students".

I think Targeting of dissenting immigrants and foreign nationals by the second Trump administration is the best option. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 00:44, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Why might we prefer this over Targeting of political dissenters for deportation by the second Trump administration? I don't know why we need identity labels if what unifies the cases is that they're vulnerable to deportation?

I oppose "immigrants" because many international students, and some others, are not "immigrants", legally or not, in the common meaning of the word as "a person who comes to a country to take up permanent residence", because they plan to stay for a limited amount of time. I don't think terms including "foreign" are preferable either, because they favor legalistic terminology at the expense of implying a value judgement about belonging. GeoEvan (talk) 08:19, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

I propose non-citizens (such as Non-citizen suffrage in the United States) Seamlessly (talk) 08:50, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

+1 Targeting of non-citizen political dissenters by the second Trump administration Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 09:18, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

I agree with GeoEvan. Vulnerability to deportation is a sufficiently unifying criteria. Targeting of political dissenters for deportation by the second Trump administration is the best title. Monk of Monk Hall (talk) 02:39, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

See Visa policy of the United States#Classes of visas Seamlessly (talk) 08:30, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

• Support change of title, because the proposals are more accurate than the present title, I am not involved enough to have a preference among the suggested new titles, so I simply support all of them. Lova Falk (talk) 07:02, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

I oppose this. The current title is more neutral and the new/proposed title introduces bias. "Targeting" is too harsh for this. Not everyone agrees about whether this is targeting specifically. There are controversies though. Temotskipa (talk) 18:21, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

The problem is that the scope of the current title is much broader than the article's contents, and overlaps too much with Immigration policy of the second Trump administration. FactOrOpinion (talk) 19:04, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

+1 to FactOrOpinion's response above. But as for the "targeting" point, I'm not sure what word more directly describes what Trump 2 has done in the article than "targeting". What part of "targeting" is inaccurate? Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 22:42, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

I recognize that the current title is problematic, but I think many of the proposals have their own problems. For example, I wouldn't characterize most of the people targeted as dissidents (e.g., Öztürk wrote a single op-ed, many of the visa revocations in higher ed didn't even involve speech but instead involved things like traffic violations). But of course one can choose to make dissidents the focus of the article and then remove content that's outside that scope. It all depends on what people think the scope should be. Perhaps it should be split into an article about visa revocations in higher ed (for both speech-related and non-speech-related reasons) and one for (attempted) visa revocations for speech-related reasons, not limited to higher ed. Or perhaps the former content would just be merged into relevant sections of existing articles, such as Targeting of political opponents and civil society under the second Trump administration § Actions against higher education. I agree that "immigrants" doesn't include those here on student visas. I think the title should make clear that the people have been targeted for deportation; "non-citizen" works for me. FactOrOpinion (talk) 16:03, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

I noticed today that in a related court case, AAUP v. Rubio, the AAUP refers to the administration's "ideological deportation policy." Perhaps something like Ideological deportation efforts in the second Trump administration would address some of the concerns that people have raised, as it avoids the word "targeting"? FactOrOpinion (talk) 22:17, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

Robloxguest3 closed, but I think closing is a little premature so I undid it, which is hopefully alright. Just leaving a note here. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 02:58, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose While I agree the current title is overbroad and doesn't accurately sum up the article's contents, proposed title's use of "targeted" violates WP:NPOV as loaded language. The original title, Activist deportations in the second Trump presidency was a more neutral (and concise) title, and I would support returning the page to it. While not all people listed may describe themselves as an activist, by and large that is the gist of the controversy described by this page. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:06, 3 August 2026 (UTC)
• "Targeted" seems dubious. AFAICT, some of the controversies have involved allegations that actions were wholesale, random and indiscriminate, not targeted. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 16:39, 3 August 2026 (UTC)
• Remove "targeted": Some of these suggestions combine "targeting" with another verb form. It would be less likely to violate WP:POVNAMING to adopt a target-free title such as Deportations of political dissenters by the second Trump administration or somesuch. RastaKins (talk) 03:31, 4 August 2026 (UTC)