7 ms·

The most interesting thing I see is people overestimate how resilient the system is. Unfortunately, this is at the whim of a president, who with a majority in t

The most interesting thing I see is people overestimate how resilient the system is. Unfortunately, this is at the whim of a president, who with a majority in the court, dictates the law. With a ban or at his whim, even legal residents can find themselves out. We tend to think the system is resilient to this, but ultimately it really isn't. Scholars cannot even agree on whether these tech workers are entitled to the amendments (since they are not citizens, despite living in the US). Much of this was eye opening for me, and is used by Rubio as a basis to deport the Korean girl and the Columbia guy (also a Harvard student as of yesterday). The law is unfortunately very vague and thus open to interpretation (which is ultimately subject to the commander in chief, the current clown)

tomohelix 2y ago
Wait until they declare nonresidents are not entitled to properties in the US and seize all bank accounts and 401k, USSR style. The scariest thing, and most absurd to me, is that even though I made that joke just 1 minute ago, now that I think about it, it is not completely impossible in this current political climate... I dread to think about what the US will be 10 years from now. Trump is not the problem. He is a solution, or claimed to be, to the ailments that plague the US. The people here want change, they know something is rotten but they don't even know what is the problem with so many lies and misdirection and days to days burdens they have to bear. So Trump become their cry for help. It is just sad and tragic. Truly something for the history book, if we ever get there.
- smallmancontrov 2y ago
  Citizens aren't far off. I give it until election season. JD Vance wrote a cover blurb for a book arguing to the MAGA base that all the milquetoast liberals they know are actually "secret communist revolutionaries" who must be "crushed" by any means necessary. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unhumans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unhumans
- HEmanZ 2y ago
  I don’t think your hypothetical is crazy at all. I learned this weekend that much of my close family, who were pretty normal conservatives just a couple of years ago, now believe that all legal and illegal immigrants have been let into the country by jws to eliminate the white race. And that’s not an exaggeration at all. Like I’m mincing words to make them look less bad. My family is not the down and out, they never supported these things because they have financial stressors. If anything the economy of the last 20 years has been too good to them. They are relatively wealthy and have stable lives and good jobs. They listen to too many alt right podcasts and are too deep down the Facebook hole. Two weeks ago I was relatively optimistic. Now I’m really scared, how do you cope with loved one’s who believe these things? We’re off to a really dark place.
  - wruza 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - watwut 2y ago
      Yeah it does change thing things whether your rhetoric involves "eliminating white race" fear and threat of Jewish. Person you responded to found out his relatives are full on nazi. That is what it means. And that means violence, intentional cruelty and loss of freedom for those around.
      - wruza 2y ago
        I see the reasoning. But assuming that the cultural threat is real for them, how would you state this problem without being a nazi? Is this possible in your "set of axioms"?
        watwut 2y ago
        "Cultural threat" is not correct descriptor of "elimination of white race". They were talking about race war, you are trying to find words that make it non fascist. So, you will need to be precise about what your euphemism of "real cultural threat" means. If it means that they perceive Jews as the reason for "elimination of white race" as they said, then it is just being Nazi with all the logical consequences. Some people are Nazi and that is that. The eternal wish to reframe far right nazi as something else and non-threatening regardless of what these people do, say or push for amounts to lying to oneself.
- tgma 2y ago
  There's a huge difference between not being able to buy properties and seizing them. The former is already in place to some degree in various forms including anti-money-laundry and sanction-prevention pretexts: https://www.kvue.com/article/news/politics/texas-legislature/house-committee-hears-testimony-ban-some-foreign-land-ownership/269-b39feb0a-937e-47d1-9858-90c957e2ad73 https://www.kvue.com/article/news/politics/texas-legislature... The latter is far more overreach but US already practices Civil Asset Forfeiture in other contexts, even for US Citizens, nothing new.
  - tomohelix 2y ago
    Comments or opinions like yours are the reasons why I think my hypothetical scenario is possible. It is too easy to view everything as "nothing new, already done in some way" and ignore the slow boil, especially when they are not directly affected or ideologically opposed to it. That is how we get people clamoring for the government to post pictures of chained people marched into extrajudicial prisons without due process. All I can say is that while some people will be insulated from the consequences, if the situation keeps escalating, do not bet on you being one of those privileged few.
BrenBarn 2y ago
> The law is unfortunately very vague and thus open to interpretation (which is ultimately subject to the commander in chief, the current clown) That is it exactly. The US legal/governmental system is a house of cards that has been running for at least 150 years on a bunch of wink-wink-nudge-nudge assumptions that both sides were too scared to test or even acknowledge. An ounce of prevention might have been worth a pound of cure, but now we'll need the cure, and it's probably going to be painful.
- MPSFounder 2y ago
  The truth is much of it could have been prevented (court packing was one idea that might have been unpopular, but there are many other ideas that could have been acted upon). We live with consequences of failures of the Democratic party for the last decade. Had Ruth Ginsberg been pressured to retire after her numerous health issues, Roe v Wade would never have been overturned (it was a 1 vote swing). Had primaries occurred, I believe the current guy (a felon) would have lost. There were many mistakes, which had they been addressed through any action (literally anything), could most certainly have been prevented. And this time around, it seems actual executive orders are shaping a very different America (that will require generations to undo). Early this week, a college program I am involved in (for STEM high school students over the summer) was cut. It was heartbreaking getting an email inquiring on why it is no longer on our website. Also it is the same song (the guy had travel bans his first admin, and is doing it again in different forms and to a wider range of individuals. We had four years to make these things difficult, but we did nothing). Holding paddles at state of unions seems to be widely believed among Democratic leadership to be effective, and there lies the issue.
  - dboreham 2y ago
    Freedom and justice should not depend on these kind of game show tactics. The system should be more resilient. Unfortunately it isn't due to the culture and social norms of the country.
    - Slava_Propanei 2y ago
tgma 2y ago
The system is actually quite resilient. What you are describing is a specific impact the system might have on someone's situation. That makes a specific situation non-resilient, not the system. Everyone in the whole world who is on a visa knows that is not the most resilient situation, by definition. Also, it is well-settled that visa is a discretionary benefit. Green card is more nuanced, but still not a panacea. Some of the "scholars" that debate these things know full well what the case law is but they want to stir the pot in the media.
- jasonjayr 2y ago
  Sure it's discretionary. But to (a) Revoke it with no warning (b) Instantly making your presense illegal, and you a criminal, and due to your new criminal status(c) immediatly abducting you by masked, unidentified "officers" in an official capacity and sending you on a plane anywhere but here, seems to, I don't know? "stir the pot" as you say? These revocations could be done far more graciously than they are. It certanly reveals how the people in charge feel about their fellow humans. It's being done this way NOT to be efficent. They're doing it to send a message. "See how quickly we can disappear you for dissent."
  - tgma 2y ago
    I mean, I was discussing the law, now we pivot to emotions? The "masked" guys immediately showed their badges if we are talking about the same incident. When you come to the US on a visa, you should not be under any illusions that is not the case. In fact, a US visa is not even guarantee of entry to the US as you are reminded when you get one. I am not aware if any other country behaves differently if they want a foreigner gone. It's not a right to be in another sovereign country. Regardless, this has pretty much nothing to do with the resilience of the system at large.
    - jltsiren 2y ago
      In Finland (and I guess in some other European countries) deportation in itself is not a sufficient reason for arrest. Once you have been informed of the decision, you get some time to leave voluntarily, or to challenge the decision in the administrative court system. But you won't be arrested until the decision is final and you have failed to leave voluntarily, unless there are specific reasons to the contrary. And those specific reasons are typically ones that would justify arresting a citizen as well.
Slava_Propanei 2y ago
[dead]
parineum 2y ago
> who with a majority in the court... There is a judicial conservative majority. That doesn't mean they are a Trumpian, Republican or even conservative rubber stamp. The court has ruled against conservatives numerous times already.
- watwut 2y ago
  They are openly enablers, twisting the rules for them whenever they can. Thomas is also quite corrupt. Kavanaugh is purely political advancing conservative project. Alito the same, with better excuses.
  - parineum 2y ago
    Kavanaugh has been a swing vote several cases that have gone against conservatives. He's been fairly judicially consistent in his interpretation of the law, even when it isn't in favor of Republicans.
    - watwut 2y ago
      Kavanaugh was put there to put an end to abortions. So, he made his promises not to end them and then he did.
nxhxgs 2y ago
Its not like immigrants have had wonderful, controllable and predictable paths to residency in the past. For those who arent Einstein or belong to the over rated HN crowd, the system has always be exploitative. Anyone who isnt born rich and has been through the process has had to live with constant fear, doubt and uncertainty.
- tgma 2y ago
  +1. This. As an alien you would have generally been extra wary of your behavior. Civil disobedience and dedication to political action is not what you should expect of an average alien. Some natural born citizens seem to have been introduced to the immigrant experience yesterday.
  - SauciestGNU 2y ago
    100% agree with civil disobedience being high risk. And it always has been for immigrants. But writing articles in a newspaper? Criticizing domestic or particular foreign governments? If immigrants can't exercise purely expressive speech something is drastically fucked up.
    - tgma 2y ago
      Rubio affirmatively suggested the op-ed is not why she got deported. Nothing happened to her co-authors.
      - SauciestGNU 2y ago
        Rubio can say what he wants but there's no record of her doing anything else and he's a proven liar. If it was something else let them allege it. There isn't. I haven't checked, but perhaps the other authors were citizens?
      - MPSFounder 2y ago
        They might have been citizens. He is a well-known liar. It most certainly is the op-ed. I know for a fact the Adelsons made contributions to the campaign for this single issue (they are fanatically Jewish and donate to Israel exorbitant amounts out of religiosity). The irony is they made their fortunes in gambling... Due process would have our gov lay out explicitly why she and others were arrested, but Thugs will behave as thugs until a bigger bully comes around

tomohelix 2y ago

Wait until they declare nonresidents are not entitled to properties in the US and seize all bank accounts and 401k, USSR style. The scariest thing, and most absurd to me, is that even though I made that joke just 1 minute ago, now that I think about it, it is not completely impossible in this current political climate... I dread to think about what the US will be 10 years from now. Trump is not the problem. He is a solution, or claimed to be, to the ailments that plague the US. The people here want change, they know something is rotten but they don't even know what is the problem with so many lies and misdirection and days to days burdens they have to bear. So Trump become their cry for help. It is just sad and tragic. Truly something for the history book, if we ever get there.

smallmancontrov 2y ago
Citizens aren't far off. I give it until election season. JD Vance wrote a cover blurb for a book arguing to the MAGA base that all the milquetoast liberals they know are actually "secret communist revolutionaries" who must be "crushed" by any means necessary. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unhumans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unhumans
HEmanZ 2y ago
I don’t think your hypothetical is crazy at all. I learned this weekend that much of my close family, who were pretty normal conservatives just a couple of years ago, now believe that all legal and illegal immigrants have been let into the country by jws to eliminate the white race. And that’s not an exaggeration at all. Like I’m mincing words to make them look less bad. My family is not the down and out, they never supported these things because they have financial stressors. If anything the economy of the last 20 years has been too good to them. They are relatively wealthy and have stable lives and good jobs. They listen to too many alt right podcasts and are too deep down the Facebook hole. Two weeks ago I was relatively optimistic. Now I’m really scared, how do you cope with loved one’s who believe these things? We’re off to a really dark place.
- wruza 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - watwut 2y ago
    Yeah it does change thing things whether your rhetoric involves "eliminating white race" fear and threat of Jewish. Person you responded to found out his relatives are full on nazi. That is what it means. And that means violence, intentional cruelty and loss of freedom for those around.
    - wruza 2y ago
      I see the reasoning. But assuming that the cultural threat is real for them, how would you state this problem without being a nazi? Is this possible in your "set of axioms"?
      - watwut 2y ago
        "Cultural threat" is not correct descriptor of "elimination of white race". They were talking about race war, you are trying to find words that make it non fascist. So, you will need to be precise about what your euphemism of "real cultural threat" means. If it means that they perceive Jews as the reason for "elimination of white race" as they said, then it is just being Nazi with all the logical consequences. Some people are Nazi and that is that. The eternal wish to reframe far right nazi as something else and non-threatening regardless of what these people do, say or push for amounts to lying to oneself.
tgma 2y ago
There's a huge difference between not being able to buy properties and seizing them. The former is already in place to some degree in various forms including anti-money-laundry and sanction-prevention pretexts: https://www.kvue.com/article/news/politics/texas-legislature/house-committee-hears-testimony-ban-some-foreign-land-ownership/269-b39feb0a-937e-47d1-9858-90c957e2ad73 https://www.kvue.com/article/news/politics/texas-legislature... The latter is far more overreach but US already practices Civil Asset Forfeiture in other contexts, even for US Citizens, nothing new.
- tomohelix 2y ago
  Comments or opinions like yours are the reasons why I think my hypothetical scenario is possible. It is too easy to view everything as "nothing new, already done in some way" and ignore the slow boil, especially when they are not directly affected or ideologically opposed to it. That is how we get people clamoring for the government to post pictures of chained people marched into extrajudicial prisons without due process. All I can say is that while some people will be insulated from the consequences, if the situation keeps escalating, do not bet on you being one of those privileged few.

BrenBarn 2y ago

> The law is unfortunately very vague and thus open to interpretation (which is ultimately subject to the commander in chief, the current clown) That is it exactly. The US legal/governmental system is a house of cards that has been running for at least 150 years on a bunch of wink-wink-nudge-nudge assumptions that both sides were too scared to test or even acknowledge. An ounce of prevention might have been worth a pound of cure, but now we'll need the cure, and it's probably going to be painful.

MPSFounder 2y ago
The truth is much of it could have been prevented (court packing was one idea that might have been unpopular, but there are many other ideas that could have been acted upon). We live with consequences of failures of the Democratic party for the last decade. Had Ruth Ginsberg been pressured to retire after her numerous health issues, Roe v Wade would never have been overturned (it was a 1 vote swing). Had primaries occurred, I believe the current guy (a felon) would have lost. There were many mistakes, which had they been addressed through any action (literally anything), could most certainly have been prevented. And this time around, it seems actual executive orders are shaping a very different America (that will require generations to undo). Early this week, a college program I am involved in (for STEM high school students over the summer) was cut. It was heartbreaking getting an email inquiring on why it is no longer on our website. Also it is the same song (the guy had travel bans his first admin, and is doing it again in different forms and to a wider range of individuals. We had four years to make these things difficult, but we did nothing). Holding paddles at state of unions seems to be widely believed among Democratic leadership to be effective, and there lies the issue.
- dboreham 2y ago
  Freedom and justice should not depend on these kind of game show tactics. The system should be more resilient. Unfortunately it isn't due to the culture and social norms of the country.
  - Slava_Propanei 2y ago

tgma 2y ago

The system is actually quite resilient. What you are describing is a specific impact the system might have on someone's situation. That makes a specific situation non-resilient, not the system. Everyone in the whole world who is on a visa knows that is not the most resilient situation, by definition. Also, it is well-settled that visa is a discretionary benefit. Green card is more nuanced, but still not a panacea. Some of the "scholars" that debate these things know full well what the case law is but they want to stir the pot in the media.

jasonjayr 2y ago
Sure it's discretionary. But to (a) Revoke it with no warning (b) Instantly making your presense illegal, and you a criminal, and due to your new criminal status(c) immediatly abducting you by masked, unidentified "officers" in an official capacity and sending you on a plane anywhere but here, seems to, I don't know? "stir the pot" as you say? These revocations could be done far more graciously than they are. It certanly reveals how the people in charge feel about their fellow humans. It's being done this way NOT to be efficent. They're doing it to send a message. "See how quickly we can disappear you for dissent."
- tgma 2y ago
  I mean, I was discussing the law, now we pivot to emotions? The "masked" guys immediately showed their badges if we are talking about the same incident. When you come to the US on a visa, you should not be under any illusions that is not the case. In fact, a US visa is not even guarantee of entry to the US as you are reminded when you get one. I am not aware if any other country behaves differently if they want a foreigner gone. It's not a right to be in another sovereign country. Regardless, this has pretty much nothing to do with the resilience of the system at large.
  - jltsiren 2y ago
    In Finland (and I guess in some other European countries) deportation in itself is not a sufficient reason for arrest. Once you have been informed of the decision, you get some time to leave voluntarily, or to challenge the decision in the administrative court system. But you won't be arrested until the decision is final and you have failed to leave voluntarily, unless there are specific reasons to the contrary. And those specific reasons are typically ones that would justify arresting a citizen as well.

Slava_Propanei 2y ago

[dead]

parineum 2y ago

> who with a majority in the court... There is a judicial conservative majority. That doesn't mean they are a Trumpian, Republican or even conservative rubber stamp. The court has ruled against conservatives numerous times already.

watwut 2y ago
They are openly enablers, twisting the rules for them whenever they can. Thomas is also quite corrupt. Kavanaugh is purely political advancing conservative project. Alito the same, with better excuses.
- parineum 2y ago
  Kavanaugh has been a swing vote several cases that have gone against conservatives. He's been fairly judicially consistent in his interpretation of the law, even when it isn't in favor of Republicans.
  - watwut 2y ago
    Kavanaugh was put there to put an end to abortions. So, he made his promises not to end them and then he did.

nxhxgs 2y ago

Its not like immigrants have had wonderful, controllable and predictable paths to residency in the past. For those who arent Einstein or belong to the over rated HN crowd, the system has always be exploitative. Anyone who isnt born rich and has been through the process has had to live with constant fear, doubt and uncertainty.

tgma 2y ago
+1. This. As an alien you would have generally been extra wary of your behavior. Civil disobedience and dedication to political action is not what you should expect of an average alien. Some natural born citizens seem to have been introduced to the immigrant experience yesterday.
- SauciestGNU 2y ago
  100% agree with civil disobedience being high risk. And it always has been for immigrants. But writing articles in a newspaper? Criticizing domestic or particular foreign governments? If immigrants can't exercise purely expressive speech something is drastically fucked up.
  - tgma 2y ago
    Rubio affirmatively suggested the op-ed is not why she got deported. Nothing happened to her co-authors.
    - SauciestGNU 2y ago
      Rubio can say what he wants but there's no record of her doing anything else and he's a proven liar. If it was something else let them allege it. There isn't. I haven't checked, but perhaps the other authors were citizens?
    - MPSFounder 2y ago
      They might have been citizens. He is a well-known liar. It most certainly is the op-ed. I know for a fact the Adelsons made contributions to the campaign for this single issue (they are fanatically Jewish and donate to Israel exorbitant amounts out of religiosity). The irony is they made their fortunes in gambling... Due process would have our gov lay out explicitly why she and others were arrested, but Thugs will behave as thugs until a bigger bully comes around