Picture this: you’ve lived in the United States for decades—worked hard, paid taxes, built a family. Now, to become a citizen or even secure a green card, the Trump administration wants you to hand over your social media accounts. Not just a quick glance—they want your usernames, your digital footprint, all of it. And it’s not optional.

This isn’t a hypothetical. Earlier this month, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)—the agency that handles naturalization and immigration—rolled out a proposal that would force an estimated 3.5 million people a year to surrender their social media handles. That’s anyone in the U.S. applying for asylum, permanent residency, or citizenship. Until now, this kind of scrutiny was reserved for foreigners applying for visas from abroad. Not anymore.

The stated goal? “Enhanced identity verification, vetting, and national security screening.” But dig deeper, and the implications are staggering—especially for activists, immigrants, and anyone who’s ever criticized the government online. With pro-Palestine voices already under fire, this feels less like a security measure and more like a crackdown on free speech.

The Executive Order Behind It All

This policy didn’t come out of nowhere. It’s tied directly to President Donald Trump’s day-one executive order, signed January 20, 2025. That order didn’t just revive his first-term Muslim travel ban—it went further. Titled as a national security measure, it demands federal agencies identify immigrants already in the U.S. who harbor “hostile attitudes” toward the country, its citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles. It also flags anyone suspected of supporting “designated foreign terrorists” or other vague threats.

The language is broad—intentionally so. USCIS points to this order in its March 5 proposal, arguing that collecting social media identifiers will help them determine if applicants pose a “security or public-safety threat.” For the 3.5 million people affected annually—many who’ve been here for years—that’s a chilling prospect. Your old tweets, your Facebook rants, even your Instagram stories could suddenly decide your fate.

A Target on Activists’ Back

The timing couldn’t be worse. Take Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia University student and pro-Palestine protester currently detained. His case has become a rallying cry for advocates who see this policy as a weapon aimed at specific groups—particularly Muslim and Arab immigrants. Robert McCaw, director of government affairs at the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), doesn’t mince words: “This policy would disproportionately harm Muslim and Arab applicants seeking citizenship who’ve dared to speak out for Palestinian human rights.”

“This policy would disparately impact Muslim and Arab applicants seeking U.S. citizenship.”

McCaw’s fear? That USCIS isn’t just collecting handles to verify identities—it’s building a database to silence dissent. “This is about control,” he says. “They’re targeting lawful speech under the guise of security.” With Trump’s executive order explicitly mentioning “hostile attitudes,” it’s not hard to imagine how a post about Gaza or a protest photo could land someone in hot water.

How Far Will They Go?

Here’s where the details get murky—and terrifying. The USCIS proposal, published March 5, doesn’t spell out limits on how this data will be used or stored. Will they stop at a one-time check? Or keep tabs on you forever? McCaw worries it’s the latter: “There’s no clear sign this intrusion into our electronics and communications will ever end—not even after you’re a naturalized citizen.”

Saira Hussain, a senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), sees another red flag: automation. She points to a news report that the State Department is already using artificial intelligence to scan social media and revoke visas for people expressing “pro-Hamas” sentiments. Could USCIS follow suit, deploying AI to flag “hostile” posts? Hussain thinks it’s likely. “This isn’t just about human review,” she says. “It’s about algorithms deciding who’s a threat—based on speech the government doesn’t like.”

The lack of boundaries is what keeps her up at night. “The proposal doesn’t say how long they’ll hold this data, who they’ll share it with, or what counts as a threat,” she explains. “That’s a blank check for abuse.”

Free Speech Under Siege

Let’s talk rights. If you’re in the U.S.—citizen, green card holder, or otherwise—the First Amendment protects your voice. Period. “The Constitution doesn’t care about your status,” Hussain says. “But this administration is trying to chip away at that truth.” She fears a “chilling effect”—where immigrants self-censor, afraid that a single post could derail their dreams.

Imagine you’re a green card holder who’s marched for justice or shared a fiery opinion online. Now you’re second-guessing every word, knowing USCIS could be watching. That’s not a hypothetical—it’s the reality this policy could create. And with AI in the mix, even sarcasm or a misinterpreted joke could trigger consequences.

Hussain ties it back to the courts: “First Amendment precedent is clear. Your speech is protected here—citizen or not. Trump’s team knows that, but they’re betting on fear to keep people quiet.”

The Clock Is Ticking

The government’s accepting public comments on this proposal until May 5, 2025. That’s your window to push back—or support it, if you see it differently. For now, 3.5 million people a year—dreamers, workers, parents, students—face a stark reality: their digital lives are fair game.

Is this about keeping America safe? Or controlling who gets to call it home? The answer’s in the details—and they’re anything but comforting.