A Deeply Fractured US
- Thread starter BeyondTheNow
- Start date
FSTO
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 7,498
- Points
- 1,210
Has it not crossed your mind that the reason its quiet in other states is that the Secretary of Homeland Security has told ICE to cool it? That right now their focus is Minnesota and especially Minneapolis and currently in the rest of the country the SOP is to be polite, no hanging out at Home Depot, and no intimidation tactics. Once ICE has got their quota in Minnesota then its off to Philly for the next round of mayhem.
I am dumbfounded that there are a bunch of you on here that will consistently carry water for this crew wannabe fascists.
- Reaction score
- 6,781
- Points
- 1,260
ICE recruitment: they’ll hire an anti-ICE journalist without so much as a simple Google search, incomplete paperwork, a failed drug test and no signature.
slate.com
You’ve Heard About Who ICE Is Recruiting. The Truth Is Far Worse. I’m the Proof.
What happens when you do minimal screening before hiring agents, arming them, and sending them into the streets? We're all finding out.
- Reaction score
- 2,802
- Points
- 1,140
I love how people were on Biden for every slip up, every sign he was slipping mentally, but here Trump is for two weeks threatning to blow up NATO and he cannot even remember which island he want to take over and it's just a Wednesday.
- Reaction score
- 20,531
- Points
- 1,160
It's amazing how far the "he may be an a**hole, but he's our a**hole" will take people.
- Reaction score
- 2,802
- Points
- 1,140
A**holes are one thing, but it hits different when it's "he may be a senile old man with the nuclear football, but he's our senile old man with the nuclear football"It's amazing how far the "he may be an a**hole, but he's our a**hole" will take people.
- Reaction score
- 12,123
- Points
- 1,040
Possible. Also possible that they are being deliberately provocative in the states where they anticipate the most resistance.
Officers should be adequately trained.
Officers should not need masks.
Officers should not need SWAT-type gear except when conducting raids against SWAT-worthy targets.
Officers should identify themselves clearly and on request.
Abuses and shootings should be fully investigated using whatever processes are customary.
Etc.
Nothing contrary to any of the above negates the authority to enforce immigration laws. The administration is doing what Trump campaigned on, and voters freely chose him. If that's fascist, we're all fascist.
- Reaction score
- 12,123
- Points
- 1,040
Obama, an intelligent and educated and articulate man particularly noted by his admirers for his speaking ability, once made a slip-of-the-tongue reference to "57 states".
GW Bush made many such gaffes.
It happens. It isn't dispositive evidence of mental decline.
Biden's critics put together his tangled speech patterns (obvious, compared with videos of his stutter-free articulate speaking ability from younger years), shuffling gait, occasional apparent confusion when moving from point to point in staged appearances, and the highly protective behaviour of his staff ("we're calling a lid") to make their conclusions.
FSTO
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 7,498
- Points
- 1,210
There is enforcing the law, then there is abusing that enforcement to the point that people refuse to cooperate with the administration.
You know this Brad, that the laws that govern us only hold up as long as the people are willing to respect those laws. That enforcement has to be seen to be administered correctly, evenly and with the minimum use of force.
The citizens of the US capacity to accept the violence of the authorities is at a much lower level than let say the citizens of Iran. The Trump administration is walking close to the line of acceptance by the tactics used by their federal forces.
- Reaction score
- 12,984
- Points
- 1,160
It's just an act. Trump trolled Greenland and NATO started planning to send troops (Canada dragged our feet) and got Canadians into a weekly fuzzy of excitement. Trump walked away with NATO making some down the road promises to him. Classic Trump 4D chess.
Besides, Canadians were screaming about from the River to the Sea but couldn't name either. It's fine.
- Reaction score
- 12,123
- Points
- 1,040
Resistance preceded the start of the current enforcement campaigns (eg. declared sanctuary cities). "Abuse followed by lack of cooperation" is not the universe in which we live. "Abuse followed by increased resistance", sure. The aim of most political opposition is not to ensure illegals get their due process before deportation; it is to prevent deportation.
Polling I've read reveals two things: a high support for enforcement of immigration law, and an increasing (but much lower) majority of displeasure with the way it is being done.
Some background: since the 1986 amnesty-for-enforcement deal, the political establishment delivered a sustained middle finger to the "enforcement" part. It was insufficiently enforced, including the provisions to hold employers liable for knowingly hiring/employing illegals. Voters finally got a choice from "Column C" and took it. "Column C" is delivering results.
Correct. Above all, the laws have to be enforced. For three decades, successive administrations had a very long window of opportunity to enforce evenly and with minimum use of force, and failed. It doesn't matter how much of that failure was intentional; they failed. I suppose the party establishments believed they could continue that state of affairs indefinitely; they guessed wrong.
As long as the administration can point to state and local politicians advocating and condoning lack of cooperation; organized civil disobedience driven by movements clearly opposed to even vanilla immigration enforcement; angry mobs going after people on the basis of appearances or associations; and multitudes of places where enforcement is being conducted without much if any physical force, that line is probably still a long ways away.
- Reaction score
- 12,123
- Points
- 1,040
Possibly. I can summarize my position in two sentences. The second statement is pre-eminent.
ICE should not behave the way it is currently behaving.
The way ICE behaves does not derogate from the administration's authority to enforce.
Then a question is whether those who agree with the first statement also agree with the pre-eminence of the second, or are they hoping/contending that failure to meet the first condition de-legitimizes enforcement? That would mean that any enforcement of any law could be de-legitimized simply by forcing authorities to escalate past some threshold.
- Reaction score
- 6,928
- Points
- 1,160
Is that not already the case? You need justification for a warrant or wiretap. Reasonable grounds for arrest. Protection from unreasonable search and seizure. Rules on proportionality. Restrictions on entrapment. Obligations on disclosure.
All of these are designed to prevent the State from using unreasonable force or methods against its citizens in their enforcement of the law. If the authorities escalate past these thresholds the enforcement actions are as you say "de-legitimized".
- Reaction score
- 12,984
- Points
- 1,160
I think what part of the confusion is that ICE goons often use administrative warrants (instead of judicial warrants) for immigration enforcement actions. These suckers are internal DHS/ICE documents that allow agents to question and arrest noncitizens.
ICE needs to have probably cause to make a lawful arrest. For immigration violations (circa 2024 - 2026 USA) probable cause generally comes from evidence the person is removable under immigration law (non white?)
Probable cause standards and contexts differ from criminal arrests because being removable is a civil violation.
ICE needs to have probably cause to make a lawful arrest. For immigration violations (circa 2024 - 2026 USA) probable cause generally comes from evidence the person is removable under immigration law (non white?)
Probable cause standards and contexts differ from criminal arrests because being removable is a civil violation.
- Reaction score
- 12,123
- Points
- 1,040
As a rhetorical flourish, sure; practically, it just means they're subject to challenge in courts, like every other abuse of the past decades.
HavokFour
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,831
- Points
- 1,040
On the topic of ICE and warrants to enter homes, the entire thread below is very much worth a read.
threadreaderapp.com
apnews.com
Thread by @ReichlinMelnick on Thread Reader App
@ReichlinMelnick: 🚨HOLY CRAP. An ICE whistleblower just revealed a secret memo authorizing ICE officers to break into homes without a judicial warrant, which DHS's own legal training materials say is unconstitutiona...…
threadreaderapp.com
Immigration officers assert sweeping power to enter homes without a judge's warrant, memo says
An Immigration and Customs Enforcement memo obtained by The Associated Press reveals that the agency allows immigration officers to forcibly enter homes to make arrests without a judicial warrant.
apnews.com
I would argue the kind of aggression being seen from ICE is performative and tantamount to intimidation rather than mission focused on deportations.
People forget. Obama hired Hohman, the same guy, to ramp up deportations. Obama was called "Deporter-in-Chief" by most of the left and some Republicans and deported more than Trump's first term. But how many clashes did ICE have back then with the average citizen?
- Reaction score
- 3,128
- Points
- 1,090
Can ICE Enter a Home to Make an Arrest With Only an Administrative Warrant?
A tentative take, on both the rights and the remedies.
www.lawfaremedia.org
some thoughts on the legalities involved
Similar threads
