6 ms·

headline is misleading, as far as anyone can tell he's been kidnapped, not arrested. allegedly, they: - follow him in to his home - refuse to identify themse

headline is misleading, as far as anyone can tell he's been kidnapped, not arrested. allegedly, they: - follow him in to his home - refuse to identify themselves - tell him his green card has been cancelled - tell his wife they'll kidnap her too if she intervenes - takes him somewhere - won't tell anyone where he is, including his (8 month pregnant) wife and lawyer allegedly they have done this because he's been loudly critical of the policies of a foreign government, which as everyone knows, is not a crime. as everyone also knows, random feds can't just kidnap you even if they think you have committed an actual crime.

anon291 2y ago
[flagged]
- azernik 2y ago
  Only after a hearing before a judge. The State Department does not have the legal authority to revoke Green Cards.
  - rexpop 2y ago
    Feels like nobody ran an integration test, and we're about to find out that 1st amendment violations are an emergent property of a complex system riddled with accountability sinks.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    Have they revoked it? I thought he’s just been arrested. That’s something various police forces within State absolutely can do with probably cause.
    - fzeroracer 2y ago
      Does it matter if he was 'arrested'? They didn't and are not following proper protocol. There was no warrant for his arrest, he's being denied his right to an attorney and are refusing to tell his representation where he is even at.
      - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > They didn't and are not following proper protocol. There was no warrant for his arrest Again, police don’t need a warrant with probable cause. > he's being denied his right to an attorney Source? His attorney is quoted in the article. > refusing to tell his representation where he is even at Source? The article states he’s at “an immigration detention facility in Elizabeth, New Jersey.” There are obvious First Amendment and free speech issues with this arrest. Those get diluted if folks start making things up about the severity of the situation.
        fzeroracer 2y ago
        > Again, police don’t need a warrant with probable cause. Yes you do. You can not just barge into someones home and perform an illegal search + arrest without extreme probable cause.. And nothing they say would rise to that level of arresting someone solely on probable cause because there's no clear imminent threat of violence. They were not able to produce a warrant. > Source? His attorney is quoted in the article. https://bsky.app/profile/premthakker.bsky.social/post/3ljxt6ftplc2a https://bsky.app/profile/premthakker.bsky.social/post/3ljxt6... [1] It takes all of five minutes to get the latest update. His attorney does not know where he's being held and no one is allowed to visit him. [1] https://www.foxnews.com/us/ice-agents-arrest-anti-israel-activist-who-led-protests-columbia-university-campus-months https://www.foxnews.com/us/ice-agents-arrest-anti-israel-act... (the related Fox News article)
        JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > Yes you do. You can not just barge into someones home and perform an illegal search + arrest Search and arrest, yes. If police see probable cause to arrest from the street, they can arrest. > because there's no clear imminent threat of violence Violence is unnecessary. If you’re caught shoplifting, the cop can arrest you without a warrant even if you weren’t violent. > His attorney does not know where he's being held and no one is allowed to visit him The tweet is from 9 hours ago. (Who is the source?) The article is newer. We know where he is.
    - azernik 2y ago
      ICE agents told his lawyer (in a phone call while he was being arrested) that it had been revoked
  - tgma 2y ago
    8 U.S.C. §1227 stipulates: Any alien (including an alien crewman) in and admitted to the United States shall, upon the order of the Attorney General, be removed if the alien is within one or more of the following classes of deportable aliens So while you may or may not need a hearing to revoke a green card, AG Bondi seems to be able to detain and summarily remove you from the US, without the need to do a hearing to 'revoke your green card' if you fall under that statue. (Note that "immigration judges" are not real courts under judicial branch. They are under AG.)
    - otterley 2y ago
      The question of whether the "alien is within one or more of the following classes" should be justiciable. If there were no check on the AG's power to make that determination, then the AG would be able to remove anyone.
      - tgma 2y ago
        The buck stops with AG for the procedural requirements, but you can certainly sue the AG after the decision has been made in (regular) court. For many of those classes the burden of proof is low if AG wants to deport them. Basically if Sec of State deems a non-citizen as bad for foreign policy, that'd be sufficient for removal. To me this sounds like a feature not a bug, for the executive branch at the Secretary level to be able to exclude a non-citizen persona non grata from the privilege of staying in the US. Also precedent exists (Harisiades v. Shaughnessy) that suggests deportation does not violate the First Amendment in these cases.
        otterley 2y ago
        I think you’re more or less right on the law, but I do think it is sad that activity that would likely be non-punishable as applied to citizens can get you ejected from the country if you’re a non-citizen. There’s not much principle there. Also there’s a bit of a wrinkle in the Harisiades case: first, it was written at the height of the Red Scare, and likely wouldn’t have concluded the same way had it been adjudicated after that ended and the Warren court era began. Second, the Court had to find that the Communist Party advocated for violent overthrow of the country in order to hold their membership as not protected by the First Amendment. Had it not done so, the court might have found that their activity was protected.
- duxup 2y ago
  How do we measure sympathy? That sounds like a thought crime.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]

anon291 2y ago

[flagged]

azernik 2y ago
Only after a hearing before a judge. The State Department does not have the legal authority to revoke Green Cards.
- rexpop 2y ago
  Feels like nobody ran an integration test, and we're about to find out that 1st amendment violations are an emergent property of a complex system riddled with accountability sinks.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  Have they revoked it? I thought he’s just been arrested. That’s something various police forces within State absolutely can do with probably cause.
  - fzeroracer 2y ago
    Does it matter if he was 'arrested'? They didn't and are not following proper protocol. There was no warrant for his arrest, he's being denied his right to an attorney and are refusing to tell his representation where he is even at.
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > They didn't and are not following proper protocol. There was no warrant for his arrest Again, police don’t need a warrant with probable cause. > he's being denied his right to an attorney Source? His attorney is quoted in the article. > refusing to tell his representation where he is even at Source? The article states he’s at “an immigration detention facility in Elizabeth, New Jersey.” There are obvious First Amendment and free speech issues with this arrest. Those get diluted if folks start making things up about the severity of the situation.
      - fzeroracer 2y ago
        > Again, police don’t need a warrant with probable cause. Yes you do. You can not just barge into someones home and perform an illegal search + arrest without extreme probable cause.. And nothing they say would rise to that level of arresting someone solely on probable cause because there's no clear imminent threat of violence. They were not able to produce a warrant. > Source? His attorney is quoted in the article. https://bsky.app/profile/premthakker.bsky.social/post/3ljxt6ftplc2a https://bsky.app/profile/premthakker.bsky.social/post/3ljxt6... [1] It takes all of five minutes to get the latest update. His attorney does not know where he's being held and no one is allowed to visit him. [1] https://www.foxnews.com/us/ice-agents-arrest-anti-israel-activist-who-led-protests-columbia-university-campus-months https://www.foxnews.com/us/ice-agents-arrest-anti-israel-act... (the related Fox News article)
        JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > Yes you do. You can not just barge into someones home and perform an illegal search + arrest Search and arrest, yes. If police see probable cause to arrest from the street, they can arrest. > because there's no clear imminent threat of violence Violence is unnecessary. If you’re caught shoplifting, the cop can arrest you without a warrant even if you weren’t violent. > His attorney does not know where he's being held and no one is allowed to visit him The tweet is from 9 hours ago. (Who is the source?) The article is newer. We know where he is.
  - azernik 2y ago
    ICE agents told his lawyer (in a phone call while he was being arrested) that it had been revoked
- tgma 2y ago
  8 U.S.C. §1227 stipulates: Any alien (including an alien crewman) in and admitted to the United States shall, upon the order of the Attorney General, be removed if the alien is within one or more of the following classes of deportable aliens So while you may or may not need a hearing to revoke a green card, AG Bondi seems to be able to detain and summarily remove you from the US, without the need to do a hearing to 'revoke your green card' if you fall under that statue. (Note that "immigration judges" are not real courts under judicial branch. They are under AG.)
  - otterley 2y ago
    The question of whether the "alien is within one or more of the following classes" should be justiciable. If there were no check on the AG's power to make that determination, then the AG would be able to remove anyone.
    - tgma 2y ago
      The buck stops with AG for the procedural requirements, but you can certainly sue the AG after the decision has been made in (regular) court. For many of those classes the burden of proof is low if AG wants to deport them. Basically if Sec of State deems a non-citizen as bad for foreign policy, that'd be sufficient for removal. To me this sounds like a feature not a bug, for the executive branch at the Secretary level to be able to exclude a non-citizen persona non grata from the privilege of staying in the US. Also precedent exists (Harisiades v. Shaughnessy) that suggests deportation does not violate the First Amendment in these cases.
      - otterley 2y ago
        I think you’re more or less right on the law, but I do think it is sad that activity that would likely be non-punishable as applied to citizens can get you ejected from the country if you’re a non-citizen. There’s not much principle there. Also there’s a bit of a wrinkle in the Harisiades case: first, it was written at the height of the Red Scare, and likely wouldn’t have concluded the same way had it been adjudicated after that ended and the Warren court era began. Second, the Court had to find that the Communist Party advocated for violent overthrow of the country in order to hold their membership as not protected by the First Amendment. Had it not done so, the court might have found that their activity was protected.
duxup 2y ago
How do we measure sympathy? That sounds like a thought crime.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]