Big News Alert

The Trump administration has appointed Mora Namdar, an attorney and part-time beauty salon owner, as Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs. This isn't just a bureaucratic reshuffle; it's placing someone with a distinctly unconventional background in a profoundly powerful position.

She now oversees everything from issuing passports to approving and, critically, revoking visas for those seeking to enter the United States. This appointment follows her previous interim roles and contributions to the controversial Project 2025.

The question isn't her personal success, but whether her unique resume aligns with the immense responsibilities of safeguarding national security and upholding American due process at our borders.

What Could Go Wrong

Giving an official the power to revoke visas based on subjective criteria like "undermining foreign policy" or "egregious censorship of American viewpoints" on social media opens a terrifying Pandora's Box. This policy risks weaponizing the visa system, turning it into a tool for political retribution against anyone deemed critical of the current administration.

It could silence dissent and stifle free expression well beyond our borders. Internal concerns about Namdar's management and morale during previous government stints suggest potential instability in a critical bureau. When such vast power is combined with questions about operational leadership, the "little guy" — the ordinary American citizen and the legitimate traveler — could face arbitrary decisions and a less accountable system. This directly impacts our nation's image and commitment to basic fairness.

Who Must Answer

President Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio must explain the rationale behind appointing someone with this specific background to such a pivotal national security and foreign policy role. Is this a reward for loyalty to Project 2025, or a genuine belief in her unique qualifications for this highly specialized work?

The administration's defense, calling criticism "sexist," deflects from legitimate questions about experience and the implications of her policy views. The American people deserve transparency, not dismissive platitudes, when such immense power over who enters our nation is being wielded. We need to understand the criteria and oversight for decisions that could drastically alter lives and international relations.

Your Call

The appointment of a beauty salon owner to decide who is banned from entering the U.S., coupled with policies targeting individuals for "censorship of American viewpoints" on social media, represents a significant shift in how our nation manages its borders and perceives free speech. This isn't merely about administrative efficiency; it's about the very principles of fairness, accountability, and the non-politicization of our immigration system.

Consider the implications for due process and the potential for abuse of power. Are we comfortable with a system where vague accusations can lead to travel bans? Are you OK with this fundamental change to who guards our gates and on what grounds?