By MALCOLM STRACHAN

IT was in 2019 that a Harvard student passing through Boston’s Logan International Airport was stopped by immigration authorities.

Ismail Ajjawi was 17 at the time, a Palestinian student heading to start his first year at the university.

Immigration officers searched his phone and laptop – and then questioned Ajjawi about social media.

Ajjawi said that a female officer told him he would be sent back to Lebanon, saying “she said she found people posting political points of view that oppose the US on my friend list”.

It is worth noting Ajjawi’s case from six years ago as we consider a new era of social media examination by US authorities – not least of all because this is something that has been happening previously.

A number of forms to fill in when you enter the US have long included space for your social media handles – so Ajjawi’s case is notable for the fact that the US has been looking at social media already anyway.

What has changed? Well, the trouble is that the evidence is largely anecdotal. The US routinely does not comment on individual cases, so what one person says may or may not be correct.

There have been some headline cases though – including musicians recently. A British punk band, UK Subs, was denied entry into the US, which one of the band, Alvin Gibbs, thought may be down to his public criticism of US President Donald Trump.

He posted on Facebook: “There were two issues: 1) they said I didn’t have the right visa for entry and 2) there was another issue, which they wouldn’t disclose, both of which prevented me from being allowed into America — I’m now wondering if my regular and less than flattering public pronouncements regarding their president and his administration were a factor; or maybe that’s just me succumbing to paranoia.”

Meanwhile, musician Neil Young has written of his fears of being denied entry to the US. He wrote on his website: “When I go to play music in Europe, if I talk about Donald J Trump, I may be one of those returning to America who is barred or put in jail to sleep on a cement floor with an aluminium blanket. That is happening all the time now. Countries have new advice for those returning to America.

“If I come back from Europe and am barred, can’t play my USA tour, all of the folks who bought tickets will not be able to come to a concert by me. That’s right folks. If you say anything bad about Trump or his administration, you may be barred from re-entering USA if you are Canadian. If you are a dual citizen like me, who knows? We’ll all find that out together.”

All of this comes at a time when the US has temporarily halted student visa application interviews worldwide – with a view to rolling out a greater examination of social media posting by would-be applicants.

This has raised some considerable disquiet as people question what is – and what is not – acceptable when it comes to social media posting.

Now the US of course has a right to govern its borders as it sees fit. It can allow in those it likes and deny those it does not like. That is its sovereign right.

But for those caught on the other side of it, it raises concern and has a chilling effect on what they feel they can and cannot say on social media.

Part of the difficulty is that there is no clear guidance. Some expressed the view that frankly perhaps it was safer to shut down social media accounts entirely for anyone looking to secure a visa – but then on Friday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio made even that not seem like an option.

He said that applicants’ lack of an online presence might be enough evidence to deny a visa.

That message came in a cable sent out on Friday which ordered new vetting procedures for all foreigners who want to visit Harvard, including “prospective students, students, faculty, employees, contractors, guest speakers and tourists”.

Consular officers are rodered to scrutinise the social media profiles of applicants and order them to switch their social media accounts to public so interviewers can see what’s in them.

“Consular officers should consider whther the lack of any online presence, or having social media accounts restricted to ‘private’ or with limited visibility, may be reflective of evasiveness,” said Mr Rubio.

Much of this seems directed at Harvard – but the halt on student visas affected everyone, so this could well be a preview of what any other applicants can expect, while that note about tourists is also chilling.

Previously, Mr Rubio has emphasised that the US would look to bar people for extremist or anti-American sentiment, especially those who support groups such as Hamas.

He said: “We’re not going to wait until someone acts out on our soil. If the warning signs are there – even on social media – we will act.”

US embassies in several countries have warned: “Think before you post. A visa is a privilege, not a right.”

There will absolutely be those who rail against such moves, asking whatever happened to free speech. It is probably worth noting that free speech is a constitutional right – but whether that applies to foreign visitors rather than American citizens is likely a court case in the making. For Bahamians here and now, the question is what to do, what to expect, how to limit your risks, rather than hoping for a legal challenge somewhere down the line.

And there is sense too in caution by any nation. If someone posted online that they were coming to The Bahamas to kill people, you would want to make sure they were denied entry. If someone posted “I hate The Bahamas” and then tried to come here, what would you want done? Let them in? Deny them entry?

Then again, how many Bahamians posted in the wake of, say, the George Floyd case, speaking out loud about the need for racial justice? Is that enough to get a rejection?

The difficulty here is in the not knowing – the uncertainty over what one can reasonably say and not hinder your movement.

Given the lack of direction on that, the proof of that will be in the cases that we see once the policies are in use. One would hope that common sense would play a part in such decisions – but looking back at that case of Ismail Ajjawi, it was not even his posts that drew concern, but those of friends. It is a worrying proposition.