5 ms·

The whole story of telling ICE agents to just go out and find people on their own seems like a setup to empower the executive branch to have their own group of

by duxup 1y ago

The whole story of telling ICE agents to just go out and find people on their own seems like a setup to empower the executive branch to have their own group of thugs. Without guidance they do what want outside the judicial system and sensible oversight / rules. This seems to be a pattern in most non democratic countries...

NickC25 1y ago
That's the gameplan, it's written in detail in the Project 2025 outline...
- krapp 1y ago
  But Trump pinky swore he wouldn't do a fascism!
  - crises-luff-6b 1y ago
    [dead]
  - helf 1y ago
    [dead]
mlsu 1y ago
Another thing that is troubling is that immigration law is sort of a parallel system to normal criminal law. The rights for the accused are lesser and obligations for officers are more lax. The burden of proof is lower. It's easier to get warrants and the rules of evidence are more relaxed. There is a parallel authoritarian system being built up, starting with the creation of DHS in 2001 and ending god knows where. The massive expansion of ICE should ring alarm bells for everyone. This power grab does not end. It will expand and continue. Why are the right libertarians and 2A folks not speaking up right now? We have masked feds rolling up and barging in without warrants...?
- duxup 1y ago
  Agreed, ICE seems like a natural org to begin extra legal actions with, fewer limits, you just claim you're doing immigration things and put the accused on a more oppressive track.
  - chneu 1y ago
    Like it's seriously Nazi shit. This is police with extreme powers. All they have to say is "We thought they were illegal" and nothing will happen.
    - know-how 1y ago
      [dead]
    - potato3732842 1y ago
      >Like it's seriously Nazi shit. This is police with extreme powers. All they have to say is "We thought they were illegal" and nothing will happen. This is barely any different from "we thought we smelled weed". The problem isn't ICE. They are just todays's live action remake of the same story we've seen before. The problem is that there is no punishment, no consequences for all those people who, regardless of if through malice or ignorance, let these precedents be made and stand. Arguably the current situation is worse than the abuses of years past because unlike drug prosecution to which a cross section of society is subjected ICE's prosecution targets (mostly) non citizens who will simply be deported to little effect upon the citizens whereas the citizens had to live with the fallout from drug prosecutions.
      - mlsu 1y ago
        It's very different. When a cop "thought he smelled weed," he still has to: - detain you and tell you why he detained you - get a prosecutor to press charges promptly, charges which have to be articulated in terms of specific statutes that your elected representatives wrote - give you defense counsel to argue your case in court - set a prompt court date to argue your case - tell the public that you were put in jail, why, and the circumstances - release those court docs to the public - follow rules of evidence when presenting their case There are abuses, but there are also a robust set of protections in place. If the cops thought they smelled weed in your car, and there was no weed in your car, you argue that in court, and it's really very likely that you will walk free. That outcome, for the most part, is why cops don't immediately put everyone with tattoos in jail. This is very very different from the alternative, which is where a cop says he thinks your tattoo might look like MS-13, so you go to an offshore prison forever, with no visitation rights and no trial. Those two outcomes are VERY different! For that reason, yes, the problem is ICE.
drcongo 1y ago
[flagged]
lmm 1y ago
Most democratic countries don't have decades of regular law enforcement refusing to enforce democratically agreed immigration law, which is what has made this defensible.
- acdha 1y ago
  You appear to be arguing that law enforcement focusing on dangers to their communities and not doing someone else’s job instead is bad. It’s exactly hard to find examples of cops who investigated real crimes and pulled ICE in when they realized the perp wasn’t here legally.
  - lmm 1y ago
    > You appear to be arguing that law enforcement focusing on dangers to their communities and not doing someone else’s job instead is bad. Deprioritising lawlessness against the will of the electorate is bad enough, but I'm talking about deliberate noncooperation policies, e.g. the California sanctuary laws. That's going much further than "focusing on" other things.
    - acdha 1y ago
      > Deprioritising lawlessness against the will of the electorate is bad enough You’re arguing that your personal opinion is “the will of the electorate”. The policies directing local police to focus on crime affecting their communities instead of shadowing federal immigration enforcement weren’t imposed by an aliens, they were enacted by democratically elected representatives. California’s sanctuary laws are the subject of considerable mythology but they had no effect on crime rates according to actual studies because they don’t prohibit cops from working with law enforcement for cases involving people who pose a risk to their communities. They can’t hold people without cause or use a parking ticket to get someone deported but there’s no problem cooperating with federal law enforcement to get rid of a robber, killer, rapist, etc. – the kind of people most of the electorate want enforcement focused on, not gardeners and farm workers. https://calmatters.org/justice/2025/01/california-sanctuary-state/ https://calmatters.org/justice/2025/01/california-sanctuary-...
NemoNobody 1y ago
Trump wants to declare martial law, he is trying to incite a reasonable enough response, the courts won't challenge him, he wants riots to be bad enough that upon his issuing the Exec Order, everyone just accepts/abides by his new king powers and obeys him like one.
know-how 1y ago
[dead]

by duxup 1y ago

NickC25 1y ago

That's the gameplan, it's written in detail in the Project 2025 outline...

krapp 1y ago
But Trump pinky swore he wouldn't do a fascism!
- crises-luff-6b 1y ago
  [dead]
- helf 1y ago
  [dead]

mlsu 1y ago

Another thing that is troubling is that immigration law is sort of a parallel system to normal criminal law. The rights for the accused are lesser and obligations for officers are more lax. The burden of proof is lower. It's easier to get warrants and the rules of evidence are more relaxed. There is a parallel authoritarian system being built up, starting with the creation of DHS in 2001 and ending god knows where. The massive expansion of ICE should ring alarm bells for everyone. This power grab does not end. It will expand and continue. Why are the right libertarians and 2A folks not speaking up right now? We have masked feds rolling up and barging in without warrants...?

duxup 1y ago
Agreed, ICE seems like a natural org to begin extra legal actions with, fewer limits, you just claim you're doing immigration things and put the accused on a more oppressive track.
- chneu 1y ago
  Like it's seriously Nazi shit. This is police with extreme powers. All they have to say is "We thought they were illegal" and nothing will happen.
  - know-how 1y ago
    [dead]
  - potato3732842 1y ago
    >Like it's seriously Nazi shit. This is police with extreme powers. All they have to say is "We thought they were illegal" and nothing will happen. This is barely any different from "we thought we smelled weed". The problem isn't ICE. They are just todays's live action remake of the same story we've seen before. The problem is that there is no punishment, no consequences for all those people who, regardless of if through malice or ignorance, let these precedents be made and stand. Arguably the current situation is worse than the abuses of years past because unlike drug prosecution to which a cross section of society is subjected ICE's prosecution targets (mostly) non citizens who will simply be deported to little effect upon the citizens whereas the citizens had to live with the fallout from drug prosecutions.
    - mlsu 1y ago
      It's very different. When a cop "thought he smelled weed," he still has to: - detain you and tell you why he detained you - get a prosecutor to press charges promptly, charges which have to be articulated in terms of specific statutes that your elected representatives wrote - give you defense counsel to argue your case in court - set a prompt court date to argue your case - tell the public that you were put in jail, why, and the circumstances - release those court docs to the public - follow rules of evidence when presenting their case There are abuses, but there are also a robust set of protections in place. If the cops thought they smelled weed in your car, and there was no weed in your car, you argue that in court, and it's really very likely that you will walk free. That outcome, for the most part, is why cops don't immediately put everyone with tattoos in jail. This is very very different from the alternative, which is where a cop says he thinks your tattoo might look like MS-13, so you go to an offshore prison forever, with no visitation rights and no trial. Those two outcomes are VERY different! For that reason, yes, the problem is ICE.

drcongo 1y ago

[flagged]

lmm 1y ago

Most democratic countries don't have decades of regular law enforcement refusing to enforce democratically agreed immigration law, which is what has made this defensible.

acdha 1y ago
You appear to be arguing that law enforcement focusing on dangers to their communities and not doing someone else’s job instead is bad. It’s exactly hard to find examples of cops who investigated real crimes and pulled ICE in when they realized the perp wasn’t here legally.
- lmm 1y ago
  > You appear to be arguing that law enforcement focusing on dangers to their communities and not doing someone else’s job instead is bad. Deprioritising lawlessness against the will of the electorate is bad enough, but I'm talking about deliberate noncooperation policies, e.g. the California sanctuary laws. That's going much further than "focusing on" other things.
  - acdha 1y ago
    > Deprioritising lawlessness against the will of the electorate is bad enough You’re arguing that your personal opinion is “the will of the electorate”. The policies directing local police to focus on crime affecting their communities instead of shadowing federal immigration enforcement weren’t imposed by an aliens, they were enacted by democratically elected representatives. California’s sanctuary laws are the subject of considerable mythology but they had no effect on crime rates according to actual studies because they don’t prohibit cops from working with law enforcement for cases involving people who pose a risk to their communities. They can’t hold people without cause or use a parking ticket to get someone deported but there’s no problem cooperating with federal law enforcement to get rid of a robber, killer, rapist, etc. – the kind of people most of the electorate want enforcement focused on, not gardeners and farm workers. https://calmatters.org/justice/2025/01/california-sanctuary-state/ https://calmatters.org/justice/2025/01/california-sanctuary-...

NemoNobody 1y ago

Trump wants to declare martial law, he is trying to incite a reasonable enough response, the courts won't challenge him, he wants riots to be bad enough that upon his issuing the Exec Order, everyone just accepts/abides by his new king powers and obeys him like one.

know-how 1y ago

[dead]