Progressive political commentator Hasan Piker faced an unusual encounter with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents upon his return to the United States from France on Sunday. Piker, a U.S.-born citizen, was on a road trip with his extended family celebrating Mother’s Day. They were turned back at Chicago O’Hare International Airport, despite the fact that he was in possession of a valid U.S. passport.
As the incident played out, law enforcement officers took Piker to a private room in the airport. There, he faced almost two hours of grilling. The years-long interrogation largely centered on his politically unpopular opinions on former President Donald Trump and the currently unfolding war in Israel. The CBP officer that interviewed her asked her rapid fire accusatory questions. They would say, “Do you enjoy Hamas? Are you in favor of Hamas? Are you a supporter of Hamas being a resistance group?
Despite the tenor of the interrogation, Piker characterized the back-and-forth as “cordial” and “routine.” He calmed his supporters’ worries that the incident did not intimidate him from continuing to speak his mind.
“Does this stop me from saying whatever the fuck I want to say? Of course not. Don’t be ridiculous.” – Hasan Piker
Piker was able to take advantage of the global entry program on this trip for the first time. This program allows trusted, pre-approved travelers to get through customs faster. Significantly, his telephone and laptop were not examined throughout the interrogation.
Chip Gibbons, policy director of Defending Rights & Dissent expressed his horror at the attack. He thinks it underscores a disturbing trend that political commentators are being subjected to heightened scrutiny at border crossings. Gibbons suggested that these practices were likely intended to intimidate people in order to chill their First Amendment protected speech.
Piker continued to explain the implications of his experience. He added, “The objective here is to sow terror into the core of people’s hearts and to create a chilling effect on speech, to demonstrate that the government is not intimidated to intimidate you.” His comments point to a real and rising fear over the extent that politics might color the way one is treated by law enforcement agencies.
The situation prompted a tremendous outcry on Twitter and other social media platforms. Some commentators criticized the CBP’s actions as politically motivated, while others dismissed Piker’s claims as exaggerated.
“This is nothing but lying for likes.” – Tricia McLaughlin
The entire exchange raises a host of important questions involving civil liberties. Indeed, it makes clear that the federal government has exceeded its authority when it interrogates citizens about their political views. Scrutiny of individuals at the border continues. What remains unclear is how these changes will translate into practice on the ground, and ultimately what effect they’ll have on protecting freedom of expression in the United States.