Judge rules that revoking of Visas is unconstitutional based on first amendment.

But once again, a district judge is making a call that is not his to make.

The decision to revoke a Visa is discretionary for the Secretary of State or anyone delegated the authority. That means that the law clearly states that Marco Rubio can determine whether or not giving or revoking a Visa is in the best interests of the country. Maybe I am missing something, but the law doesn't say the Secretary of State has authority as long as a district judge signs off on it.

While I am a free speech advocate, I am not a free speech absolutist. I believe that there are limited times where free speech can push it's way into areas that are not protected. I also believe that there is a difference between someone having free speech in this country and someone on a Visa who needs to be held to the standard of yielding a positive (not negative) contribution to the country. Not sure how stirring up antisemitism and promoting violence is a positive contribution. Whether or not it is protected free speech in a normal sense of the word is a different question and quite moot to the law in question.