New Bill Would Give Marco Rubio "thought Police" Power to Revoke U.s. Passports
Key topics
A new bill proposed by Marco Rubio would grant the US government the power to revoke passports, sparking concerns about government overreach and threats to free speech, with commenters expressing alarm and skepticism about the bill's implications.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Very active discussionFirst comment
4m
Peak period
22
0-12h
Avg / period
5.8
Based on 29 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Sep 14, 2025 at 5:00 AM EDT
4 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Sep 14, 2025 at 5:05 AM EDT
4m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
22 comments in 0-12h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Sep 19, 2025 at 7:00 PM EDT
4 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
It’s very obvious at this point that they are absolutely sure that they aren’t going to be “out of power” any time soon.
"There is only one party in the United States, the Property Party; and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat. Republicans are a bit stupider, more rigid, more doctrinaire in their laissez-faire capitalism than the Democrats, who are cuter, prettier, a bit more corrupt, until recently, and more willing than the Republicans to make small adjustments when the poor, the black, the anti-imperialists get out of hand. But, essentially, there is no difference between the two parties." - Gore Vidal (1975 or before)
See also: https://elpidio.org/2025/07/12/the-state-of-the-union-gore-v... (original: "The State of the Union" May Day, May 1, 1975 in Esquire)
They're both equally as radicalized. They're just playing different roles.
One side are the enforcers and the other side are the enablers. They agree 100% on what they're doing, they just don't agree on how they're doing it.
But they both have been doing it for a long time now, it just so happens to have mostly been heaped upon those who do you not consider human.
This is just the chickens coming home to roost.
Let's not confuse "huge differences" with huge emotional polarization over "small adjustments". Even on ICE tactics there aren't huge differences in method between Biden's and Trump's admins. The scales are different but the methods are the same, "administrative warrants" were upheld by SCOTUS and were/are used by both admins - as recently explained by IL Gov. Pritzker (D) on Jon Stewart's show.
> and completely asymmetric levels of radicalization.
I don't keep exacts stats but the numbers of politically-motivated murders seem to be very similar for both sides - it's a good argument in favor of rather symmetric levels of radicalization.
from the white house redecorations, to the trump 2028 hats, to the gerrymandering going on in many states. capture of judiciary, suppression of free speech etc. the 'us' vs 'them' mentality.
I think it would be unprecedented in the US, and over the years the red flags have been increasing, so the signs aren't good - but not there yet.
Would you say it’s holding?
But I don't think it has collapsed yet, or you think it has?
Mine is probably free speech, it's also not in a great shape either. But without separation of powers, free speech is quick to crumble into a precarious position.
So we have the important three:
- judiciary
- law making by Legislature
- executive powers for enforcing law
It's one of the most important things to keep them separated and not interweaved. The three powers control each other and the fourth one controlling the controlling:
- journalism and it's covered investigations or whistleblowers
And then you need the rule of law that the law is the only law.
This ground pillars of democracy.
Statements or actions taken by some fringe group are in no way equivalent to statements and actions taken by the actual government—which is currently being run based on fringe right wing ideology.
They had implicit support from the prior administration and their friendlies. They wouldn’t be touched and the prior administration used Unicorn Riot doxxing data to make adverse decisions against the doxxed individuals.
So I continue to maintain that similar actions taken wrt Charlie Kirk are only proper for what Unicorn Riot did to enable harassment.
Perhaps it might be a better idea to not allow doxxed data to be used for adverse decisions against people.
They might have dreams of a 100 year 4th reich, but its not going to happen.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aptheker_v._Secretary_of_State ("Aptheker v. Secretary of State" (1964))
> In Aptheker, the petitioner challenged Section 6 of the Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950, which made it a crime for any member of a Communist organization to attempt to use or obtain a passport.[1]"
Some expanded context,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under_Unit... ("Freedom of movement under United States law")
Just like my wife treats my wishes.
3 more comments available on Hacker News