19 ms·

"If you're a green card holder" is a pretty big caveat to be leaving out! Suddenly the framing of the crime is less "walking around without ID" and more "being

"If you're a green card holder" is a pretty big caveat to be leaving out! Suddenly the framing of the crime is less "walking around without ID" and more "being a foreigner who can't produce documentation of legal presence". Both are shitty situations, but do you see how much more surprising it is to hear that a court will uphold the criminality of something that everyone seems to do all the time with no consquences, than that there's apparently no political will to fix what amounts to, on the happy path, a trivial inconvenience for a small class of politically unpopular noncitizens?

magicalist 5y ago
> Both are shitty situations, but do you see how much more surprising it is to hear that a court will uphold the criminality of something that everyone seems to do all the time with no consquences The court didn't "uphold the criminality" of anything because Patel was never charged with anything, and the cop had no idea he was a foreigner when he partially paralyzed the man by throwing him into the ground. And the court definitely didn't uphold the criminality of the police officer's behavior, where apparently "strong though disputed evidence that he jerked his arm" is sufficient license for the cop to then do whatever he wants. > there's apparently no political will to fix what amounts to, on the happy path, a trivial inconvenience for a small class of politically unpopular noncitizens? I'm assuming the assault by a police officer and the complete lack of recourse aren't the trivial inconveniences you're referring to?