Florida councilman faces backlash over calls to deport Indians

(PALM BAY, FLORIDA) A Florida city official is facing sweeping penalties after calling for the mass deportation of Indians from the United States 🇺🇸. The Palm Bay City Council voted 3-2 on October 17, 2025, to censure Councilman Chandler Langevin for a series of inflammatory posts on X and for using city letterhead without approval. The resolution imposes strict limits on his role inside City Hall and has triggered a wider debate over immigration rhetoric, free speech, and safety in a diverse community.

Langevin’s posts, made throughout early October, included a now-deleted message stating: “There’s not a single Indian that cares about the United States. They are here to exploit us financially and enrich India and Indians. America for Americans.” On October 2, his birthday, he posted that all he wanted was for President Trump “to revoke every Indian visa and deport them immediately.” In other posts, he claimed “Indians don’t assimilate” and accused them of coming “to drain our pockets.”

Amid public outrage, Langevin later said he meant temporary visa holders rather than Indian Americans, but that clarification did little to ease anger among residents, business owners, and faith leaders.

Censure and restrictions

The censure is not symbolic. Under the measure:

• Langevin must get consensus from the council before placing items on future agendas.
• He is barred from speaking during the commissioner comments portion of meetings.
• He has been removed from all committees.
• He can request consensus to add items in the future, but can no longer act alone.

City officials also sent a letter to Florida Governor Ron DeSantis asking for Langevin’s suspension from office, citing state authority that allows the governor to suspend municipal officials. That power is outlined in Florida’s Constitution, and Palm Bay’s request now puts the decision before Tallahassee.

For reference, the state’s suspension process is detailed by the Florida government in Article IV, Section 7 of the Constitution, available on the official site of the State of Florida’s legislature: Florida Constitution, Article IV, Section 7.

The council’s action followed packed public meetings where residents directly addressed the mass deportation comments and the use of city letterhead. The Palm Bay City Council heard from a wide range of speakers, including business leaders and civil rights advocates, who argued that such rhetoric puts Indian Americans and Indian nationals at risk.

• Mayor Rob Medina, who voted in favor of the censure, said: “This nation was founded on immigrants. … We are all part of the very fabric of the flag, our banner, the United States of America.”
• Deputy Mayor Mike Jaffee, who introduced the motion to censure, urged Langevin to “change your course,” noting the strain the controversy has placed on city government.

According to analysis by VisaVerge.com, the council’s move underscores how local bodies can respond to elected officials’ speech when it intersects with official resources and community safety. While a censure does not remove a councilmember from office, it can sharply reduce influence and limit access to city platforms, as happened here. In Palm Bay, the council went further by formally asking the governor to consider suspension under state law.

Community response and legal fight

The backlash was swift and wide. Indian American groups at the national and regional levels organized, with many traveling to Brevard County to attend meetings and call for Langevin’s resignation.

• Bharat Patel, former chair of the Asian American Hotel Owners Association, told the council on October 2 that the rhetoric “echo some of history’s darkest rhetoric” and warned it could lead to violence.
• Prashant Patel, president of the Indian American Business Association and Chamber, called the remarks “deeply polarising,” reflecting worry among immigrant entrepreneurs and hotel owners who play a large role in Florida’s economy.

Advocacy group Hindus for Human Rights formally urged Governor DeSantis to remove Langevin from office. City officials made a similar request in writing, emphasizing the severity of his posts and their potential impact on public trust.

While some of Langevin’s supporters defended his right to speak on immigration, the volume of criticism—especially around calls for mass deportation of Indians—dominated the hearings.

Langevin has pushed back publicly:

• He told The Washington Post his goal was to start a “discourse” on immigration policy and noted he was “not the first Republican to make a mean tweet.”
• He described the censure as “1st Amendment retaliation”, saying it allows a majority to silence a minority voice in a representative body.
• He accepted the censure and committee removals but objected to the ban on speaking during commissioner comments, calling it “un-American.”

Through his attorney, Lake County Commissioner Anthony Sabatini, Langevin announced plans to file a federal First Amendment lawsuit against the city. He also stated he has “no intention of abdicating his seat,” adding, “I’m not going anywhere.”

• On October 8, he posted a qualified apology on X to “Patriotic Americans of the Hindu faith,” while repeating his opposition to “all illegal immigration and most legal immigration.”
• On October 18, he claimed conservative Hindu groups in Florida supported his anti-immigration stance.

Core issues and stakes

At the core of the fight are two competing principles often seen in local government:

1. Elected leaders carry special responsibility when speaking about immigrant communities and must avoid language that can inflame bias or fear.
2. Elected officials retain strong free-speech rights, especially when commenting on public policy, even if their words offend.

Supporters of the censure argue that tying calls for mass deportation of Indians to official city identity—through alleged misuse of letterhead—blurs the line between personal opinion and city positions. Opponents argue elected officials should retain broad speech protections. That tension will likely play out if the promised lawsuit proceeds.

Local impact and concerns

The practical stakes are immediate for Palm Bay:

• With Langevin removed from committees and limited in meetings, the council will conduct business with tighter controls on member participation.
• Residents who spoke at recent sessions said they fear targeted harassment and economic fallout.
• Business owners reported employees asking whether it’s still safe to attend community events or wear cultural attire in public.
• Parents expressed worry that national headlines focusing on Palm Bay could lead to bullying in schools.

Mayor Medina and several speakers stressed that policy debates over visas and border enforcement are part of democracy, but blanket claims about a group’s loyalty cross a line.

In a city with growing diversity, trust between officials and residents is not abstract — it affects who feels safe to report crimes, attend school meetings, or apply for permits.

What comes next

• The governor’s office now has an official request to consider suspension under state law.
• Langevin plans a federal lawsuit claiming First Amendment violations.
• The Palm Bay City Council faces the immediate task of repairing relationships with residents who felt targeted while maintaining a process that respects speech rights and keeps meetings functional.

The case stands as a warning for local governments: social media posts by elected officials can quickly move from online controversy to formal sanctions, especially when they call for drastic actions like revoking visas or deporting entire communities. For Palm Bay, the immediate priorities are rebuilding trust and ensuring public safety while the legal and political processes play out.