1. United States
2. Mich.
3. Letter

I am writing to express my deep concern about H.R. 5300, introduced by Rep. Brian Mast, which would grant the Secretary of State unprecedented power to revoke American citizens' passports. This bill poses a significant threat to our constitutional rights and democratic principles. The proposed legislation would allow the Secretary of State to revoke passports of individuals convicted or even merely charged with material support for terrorism. It would also permit passport denial for those determined to have aided organizations designated as foreign terrorist groups. While these aims may seem noble on the surface, the bill's broad language and lack of clear safeguards create a dangerous potential for abuse. The vague definitions in H.R. 5300 could easily lead to the targeting of political activists, particularly those advocating for causes that may be unpopular with the current administration. For instance, pro-Palestinian activists could find themselves at risk of losing their right to travel simply for expressing their views. This chilling effect on free speech is antithetical to our nation's values. Moreover, the bill grants excessive discretion to define terrorist groups and what constitutes aid. This opens the door for political manipulation and could result in the punishment of minority groups or political opponents, reminiscent of past abuses of power in our nation's history. While Rep. Mast has reportedly introduced an amendment to remove the most controversial provision following public outcry, the core issues with the bill remain. The potential for misuse of this power is too great to ignore, especially in light of recent threats by some administrations to use official powers against critics. I urge you to oppose H.R. 5300 when it comes before the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Instead, I ask that you advocate for legislation that protects both national security and citizens' rights to travel and free speech. We must not sacrifice our fundamental freedoms in the name of security, as doing so ultimately makes us less secure as a nation. The consequences of passing such a bill could be severe and long-lasting. It would set a dangerous precedent that could be exploited by future administrations to silence dissent and restrict the movement of American citizens based on their political beliefs. We must stand firm in protecting the rights that define our democracy. I look forward to hearing your stance on this critical issue and the actions you plan to take to protect our constitutional rights.