Bordering on Censorship

As he spoke with officers, Kitchen said it quickly became clear why he had been put in their crosshairs. During the protests that roiled Columbia University in the spring of 2024, he had chronicled the demonstrations in a series of Substack posts. While his sympathies unquestionably were with the student protesters, his writing mostly amounted to on-the-ground observations—more student journalism than anything else. But Donald Trump’s administration had apparently taken notice. One officer, Kitchen recalled, explicitly told him he was being detained because of “what you wrote online about the protests at Columbia.”

“The vibe was that they’d read it and were fully familiar with it,” Kitchen said, adding that authorities began to press him on his views about Israel and Gaza.

Since taking office, Trump’s administration has deported or revoked the visas of several pro-Gaza student protesters, accusing them of spreading “pro-Hamas” or anti-Semitic sentiment, and setting up a high-profile legal battle. “It is a privilege to be granted a visa to live and study in the United States of America,” Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said of a Columbia student. “When you advocate for violence and terrorism that privilege should be revoked, and you should not be in this country.”

Given the scrutiny surrounding the Columbia protests and detention of student activist Mahmoud Khalil, Kitchen said he had been mindful that his writings could attract unwanted attention. So, before his trip, he took what he thought were prudent steps: “I had taken all that information off the internet 48 hours before in preparation for crossing the border. They had already read it before I got on the plane. So what I’ve been trying to make clear to travelers and journalists is by the time you take your social media down, it might already be too late.”

Kitchen said the authorities demanded he surrender his phone and its passcode or face immediate deportation. Hoping they would see he wasn’t a threat, he reluctantly complied. He said that they took his phone to another location and that he believes they downloaded its contents and used software to rummage through the data. At one point, he said immigration authorities even demanded he unlock a private folder in the Photos application, which required additional authentication via Face ID.

“I’m worried that I was—and have been—pulled into this immense surveillance apparatus and that the information on my phone will be used to link me to other people and other people to me,” Kitchen said.

Eventually, after going through his phone, Kitchen said officers informed him they had found evidence of prior drug use that contradicted his immigration paperwork. Not wanting to mislead federal authorities, he admitted he had previously purchased marijuana in New York (which is legal) and used substances while abroad. That admission, he said, was then used as the official basis for denying him entry.

In a statement to Status, a Homeland Security spokesperson called allegations that Kitchen was “arrested for political beliefs” “unequivocally false,” insisting he was denied entry because he “gave false information on his ESTA application regarding drug use.” A spokesperson did not answer follow-up questions, including why he was initially flagged at passport control and why agents questioned him about his views on Israel and Gaza.

After the hours of questioning and detention were over, Kitchen said he was escorted to another Qantas flight, handed off to the crew by CBP agents, and deported to Australia. His phone, sealed in an envelope by the agents and given to the flight crew, wasn’t returned to him until after landing—a move Kitchen called “deeply disappointing” on the part of the airline.

When he arrived home, Kitchen said the first thing he did was restore the posts that had drawn so much attention. “As soon as I got home I opened my computer and I just clicked republish, republish, republish,” he said. “Because I want to be forthcoming. I want people to read the posts and see just how moderate they were. I was targeted for having a reasonable opinion, not some outlandish, radical one.”

The Committee to Protect Journalists condemned the episode, calling it a “clear case of retaliation in connection with his reporting” and saying “such action sends a chilling message to journalists that they must support the administration’s narratives or face forms of retribution.”

Kitchen's ordeal serves as yet another example of how the Trump administration has cracked down on free speech. Far from upholding the spirit of the First Amendment, this case appears to be part of a broader pattern of using government power to chill dissent and punish those whose views fall outside the administration’s favored narratives—a troubling development for a country that has for so long championed press freedom.

Kitchen, for his part, didn’t mince words when asked what he’d say to anyone who believes the Trump administration is pro–First Amendment and pro–free speech. “The Trump administration is lying," he said. "And anyone who believes that the Trump administration has a sincere interest in speech and speech rights is—I find it hard to find the words to describe that person—because at this point it’s clear this is a profoundly cynical and untrustworthy administration.”

Infighting Over Iran: Donald Trump is facing more opposition from MAGA Media over his increasingly hawkish position on Iran. After Trump ripped Tucker Carlson for being "kooky" and no longer having a television show, Candace Owens came to the far-right podcaster's defense. Owens zinged Trump for being "completely out of touch" attacking new media "given the fact that podcasters won Trump the election." Owens—who has notably peddled anti-semitic rhetoric in recent years— also excoriated Trump for having "completely fractured his base" for the "neocons" by supporting Israel's aggression, describing the situation as "truly unbelievable." Meanwhile, Sean Hannity hosted Mark Levin, who screamed Tuesday night (yes, he was literally screaming), upset at those in right-wing media who have warned that Trump could drag the U.S. into a “forever war.”

► Related: Carlson continued to voice opposition to the U.S. going to war with Iran, posting a teaser clip of a brutal interview he conducted with Ted Cruz, grilling the senator on the issue.

Tucker Takes on Yaccarino: Wall Street Journal editor Emma Tucker on Tuesday returned fire at Linda Yaccarino, one day after the X executive slimed The WSJ over a startling article it printed about the company. "Does anyone still read that publication?" Yaccarino wondered on Monday, when Axios' Sara Fischer asked her about the article, which reporting that X had pressured advertisers to come back to the Elon Musk-owned platform with threats of lawsuits. On Tuesday, Fischer also interviewed Tucker at Cannes Lions, asking for her response. "First of all, Linda Yaccarino said nobody reads the Wall Street Journal, and also that's news to me, because — you know — we have nearly 5 million subscribers now ... I'm surprised at her take on that," she said. Tucker went on to say that such reactions would not deter the newspaper. "Many of the stories we publish do upset political leaders or CEOs," she said.

Amazon's A.I. Alert: Amazon boss Andy Jassy delivered a stark message to the tech company's workforce on Tuesday: A.I. is coming for your jobs. "We will need fewer people doing some of the jobs that are being done today, and more people doing other types of jobs," Jassy wrote in a candid memo. "It’s hard to know exactly where this nets out over time, but in the next few years, we expect that this will reduce our total corporate workforce." Jassy advised employees to learn how to use the technology and "how to get more done with scrappier teams." Suffice to say, no matter how good all employees get at using A.I., the reality is that the workforce will inevitably be cut as it continues its rapid advancement—and Jassy and all the other Big Tech leaders who recycle that cliché piece of advice surely know that.

Streaming Takes the Crown: Streaming has hit a new, momentous milestone. Nielsen said Tuesday that its share of total television usage "outpaced the combined share of broadcast and cable for the first time ever." That's according to the measurement firm's monthly The Gauge report, which found that streaming accounted for 44.8% of television viewing, versus 20.1% for broadcast and 24.1% for cable. Of the streamers, YouTube again dominated the field, with 12.5% of time and “the highest share of TV for any streamer to date.” The Google-owned platform was followed by Netflix (7.5%), Disney (5%), Amazon Prime (3.5%), Paramount+ (2.2%), Tubi (2.2%), Warner Bros. Discovery (1.5%), and Peacock (1.4%).