Alistair Kitchen, an Australian writer who has made waves for his outspoken criticism of the Trump administration and advocacy for pro-Palestinian causes, was recently detained at Los Angeles International Airport. He was subsequently deported back to Melbourne. His detention has raised tremendous alarm among proponents of free speech and expression. PEN America, in particular, has been vocal in slamming the actions of U.S. border officials—calling them an infringement on the rights of writers and scholars.
Kitchen’s nightmare began the instant he touched down in Southern California. Border officials detained him, citing his articles about pro-Palestinian campus protests as the justification. He believes he was “clearly targeted for politically motivated reasons” due to his outspoken views on Hamas and related topics. Kitchen’s experience highlights the potential risks faced by individuals who express dissenting opinions, particularly regarding sensitive geopolitical issues.
In a somewhat ironic turn of events, Kitchen first responded “no” on his Esta application. This was during an exchange when he admitted to past recreational drug use. Under cross-examination with the border enforcement agents, he acknowledged purchasing cannabis in New York, where it is legal. He further disclosed that he’d used illicit drugs while traveling to other countries. Even while in detention, the public officials were primarily concerned with his activities of writing or authored works. This revelation didn’t appear to be the primary cause for his arrest.
PEN America raised concern about Kitchen’s treatment in a statement issued last week. The organization emphasized that writers, artists, and scholars must have the freedom to express their views without jeopardizing their ability to move across borders. PEN America believes that free speech is a foundational and universal human right. Too often, that right is constrained. That’s why the First Amendment in the United States protects the free speech of citizens and non-citizens alike.
“It is gravely concerning to read an account of someone being detained and turned away at the border due to their writings on student protests, Palestine, and the Trump administration,” said PEN America in a statement.
Chris Michaelsen, a law professor at the Australian National University, told The Conversation what Kitchen’s case could mean. He explained that once a person takes a critical stance, they become a target for the police to focus on and surveil. He claimed that these types of acts can be used as a tool to limit free speech, often overlapping with immigration policies.
“What’s happening is that once you say something critical, you appear on somebody’s radar,” Michaelsen remarked. “It’s used as a pretext to basically invoke the real powers that they have.”
The case set off debates about the chilling effect these detentions can have on public discourse. Richard Marles, Australia’s acting prime minister, warned that incidents like Kitchen’s could deter individuals from speaking out for fear of repercussions.
Anthony Loewenstein, an Australian author and journalist, expressed a similar measure of disbelief. He noted that many travelers, particularly writers and academics, are now seeking legal advice before embarking on trips to the U.S. due to concerns about their freedom of speech being compromised.
“You can’t stop immigration officials Googling you,” Loewenstein stated, highlighting the scrutiny many face at the border. “The American government seemingly doesn’t want a plurality of views.”
Kitchen’s case was already the spark for a renewed challenge to the policies that currently control U.S. border enforcement. As part of their vetting process, U.S. officials can inspect travelers’ electronic devices and online communications. Failure to allow these inspections could result in being denied entry, triggering concerns over first amendment rights and freedom of expression.
Michaelsen noted that border officials are not allowed under the law to deny entry to a person based on their speech or written advocacy. That’s a license granted and now threatened by the First Amendment.
“That is anti-democratic, and it must be halted,” PEN America added in their statement regarding Kitchen’s deportation.
The impact of Kitchen’s deportation reaches far past his singular experience. Critics say that these kinds of actions are part of a larger effort to curtail freedom of expression across the United States. They argue that the ensuing intellectual starvation may starve alternative thought and discourse from the marketplace, robbing American society of substantive diversity of thought.
As Loewenstein cautioned, if we allow these trends to continue, they will result in a profound impoverishment for American intellectual life.
“I think the result will be that America and American intellectual life will become poorer,” he remarked.