Than why not say 'in India', instead of 'Indian'? There are many Indian people living and working in the US, with US citizenship. Conversely, if they had been US citizens ('Americans') living in India, the legal problem may have been similar.

Saying 'low-level Indian contractors' brings to mind a specific, at least somewhat xenophobic, image,and is very often used very casually.

You seem to have assumed that the poster is talking about ethnicity or heritage rather than citizenship or geographical ___location.

One of the things that I like about HN over (say) Reddit is the guidelines for comments work pretty well. I’m particularly thinking of “Assume good faith.” - absent any other evidence, it’s better to assume that other posters are not racist assholes if you’re not sure if someone is talking about citizenship versus ethnicity.

The vast majority of people living on India are Indian, no?

Almost everyone living in India is Indian, but not all Indians live in India.

But if I were a betting man, I'd wager that the vast majority of Indians in the world do live in India, based purely on the population total of India.

True. But most of the people commenting here in this thread are not from India, so most of the Indians we interact with are probably not in India.

Legally speaking, US citizens would still be liable.