9 ms·

While your question is meaningful and well intentioned, let me point out that it may be inconsequential. The legality of an action is moot when the regime ignor

by goku12 1y ago

While your question is meaningful and well intentioned, let me point out that it may be inconsequential. The legality of an action is moot when the regime ignores and defies the entire basis of those laws - the constitution. It's like trying to evaluate yourself against a standard that is no longer followed. Instead, evaluate yourself on the basis of your standing with the regime. If they dislike you for any reason including your skin color, they will find some sort of national security threat in your actions. Or they may punish you first and then claim the inability to correct it. On the other hand if they need you, they will completely ignore your actions, including even leaking of extremely sensitive information to unauthorized individuals.

account42 1y ago
[flagged]
- JeanMara 1y ago
  >Deporting people who are in the country illegally Oh? What about people who are permanent residents and are arbitrarily deemed "threat to national security" because of their opposition to Israel? What about the recent denaturalization DOJ unit that was just set up? Are those people "illegally" here too and that is constitutionally valid? The tunnel vision here is astounding. Do you really not realize that this administration isn't stopping at "just the illegals?" They have deported US citizens, children at that.
  - rantallion 1y ago
    Indeed. GP needs to read "First They Came".
    - immibis 1y ago
      The HN voting record shows that HN broadly agrees with GGP (your GP). It makes sense, since people here are big tech developers, who will never come into contact in police in this kind of way.
    - catlover76 1y ago
      [dead]
- zabzonk 1y ago
  how about illegally deporting people?
- thinkharderdev 1y ago
  Deporting people who are in the country illegally is in line with the constitution. Deporting people without due process is not.
  - ElevenLathe 1y ago
    Even this is stretching it. It's not as though the Andrew Jackson administration was doing deportations (besides the Trail of Tears, which was euphemistically referred to as a deportation campaign). The practice of criminalizing immigration enforcement didn't coincide with any amendment to the Constitution, which is itself only nominally even part of U.S. law anymore.
  - Dig1t 1y ago
    Genuinely curious for a good faith answer: one administration allows tens of millions of people into the country during its term. You are saying that every individual is owed multiple court hearings, the full gamut which is usually used for people overstaying a visa or something. A system equipped to handle a relatively small number of people. The court system cannot possibly fulfill these tens of millions of cases in any reasonable time frame. These people will be in court for the rest of our lives and in the meantime they will have children and ultimately be allowed to stay forever by some future administration. Which is basically the same as just making them citizens. Do you have a proposed solution other than decades worth of court dates? It doesn’t really seem like the other side has a good faith solution to the problem other than just letting them all stay here forever. Or maybe I’m missing something and haven’t heard the other side’s arguments.
    - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y ago
      > Do you have a proposed solution other than decades worth of court dates? It doesn’t really seem like the other side has a good faith solution to the problem other than just letting them all stay here forever. I think we are at a point where we should accept that there will be decades of court dates. The real alternative is that anyone can be taken away because there would be no process for even a multi-generation born citizen to challenge the arrest. The real deterrent for it happening to such a citizen is reporting and publicity, which is increasingly seeming like it can be thwarted by a population that is primed to strip the humanity of those they disagree with. The way this is being handled, the timeline where we just let those 10 million stay in the country and avoid similar things in the future seems very appealing indeed. Two wrongs don’t make a right, as the saying goes.
- djexjms 1y ago
  What about ignoring due process while doing so? Is that, in your view, in line with the constitution? If it is, what recourse does a US citizen detained by ICE (either accidentally or not) have? Also, how do you view Trump's efforts to end birthright citizenship via Executive Order? Birthright citizenship is in the 14th Amendment. If the president is allowed to arbitrarily redefine who is and is not a citizen, are constitutional protections anything more than ink on paper?
- moolcool 1y ago
  What about deporting a student who is in the country legally as punishment writing an op-ed you don't like?
  - mensetmanusman 1y ago
    America argues it is their right to assemble who they want in their borders.
    - nullstyle 1y ago
      Not America. The current administration and a select set of piss poor citizens
  - Slamidan 1y ago
    as a guest that's the deal in most countries.
    - Tryk 1y ago
      What makes you say that?
    - breakyerself 1y ago
      Do you like freedom or not?
    - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
      > that's the deal in most countries Most countries aren’t America.
      - buzzerbetrayed 1y ago
        So.. America can't protect American interests when deciding who should be in the country? If I went to Mexico and started protesting I would fully expect Mexico to send me home. And I'd support their right to do so.
- pjc50 1y ago
  Easy when a DOGE 21 year old can simply open up the SSN database and set your "legal resident?" flag to "no".
  - cyanydeez 1y ago
    it's unlikely the original SS databased had any information about this. The new one they're building is clearly going to have all this bullshit so they can cherry pick at lightning speed reasons to exile, rendition or punish people. But just so we're clear, the SS doesn't really care if you're a citizen. All it's tracking is who pays into it and who receives the benefits from the payments.
    - pjc50 1y ago
      Yeah, I don't think the US actually has a reliable nationality status database other than those it's issued passports to. This may make the situation worse rather than better for those affected.
- sorcerer-mar 1y ago
  https://www.cato.org/blog/50-venezuelans-imprisoned-el-salvador-came-us-legally-never-violated-immigration-law https://www.cato.org/blog/50-venezuelans-imprisoned-el-salva... What about sending people who are here legally to a foreign torture camp (not "deporting", by the way) without due process? Is that in line with the Constitution? No. No it is not. Stop playing stupid. https://www.onthewing.org/user/Bonhoeffer%20-%20Theory%20of%20Stupidity.pdf https://www.onthewing.org/user/Bonhoeffer%20-%20Theory%20of%...
- chasd00 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - breakyerself 1y ago
    As if that's the extent of things. As if the worst abuses of the Trump administration are just deporting people who were here illegally. Don't worry about the mass revocations of legal status of previously legal residents. The deprivation of due process. The sending of people to a foreign prison where they endure all kinds of human rights abuses based on flimsy evidence, no due proceas and no expectations of ever getting out alive. Fascist fucks
- easyThrowaway 1y ago
  They had people being deported while they were on the queue to renew their documents. US American born citizens were deported just because they "looked latinos". Your legal status is pretty much just in the eyes of whoever ICE agent you're gonna meet today.
  - Dig1t 1y ago
    Is there proof of this? What’s the source? US citizens were deported because of their skin color? I think this is disinformation.
    - rawgabbit 1y ago
      https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jun/16/los-angeles-immigration-raids-montebello https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jun/16/los-angeles-... https://www.wsj.com/us-news/ice-us-citizens-arrest-deportation-risk-580c67e6 https://www.wsj.com/us-news/ice-us-citizens-arrest-deportati...
      - Dig1t 1y ago
        >Gavidia was released >Eventually, the officers reviewed the identification in his wallet and released him I thought you said they were deported based on their skin color? Both of these articles seem to say the opposite of that.
        bigbadfeline 1y ago
        Much selective quoting on your part, here is the other half of the truth: > Gavidia was released, but Javier Ramirez, another US citizen who is Gadivia’s friend and coworker, was detained by two agents, forced facedown on the ground and taken to federal detention, where he has remained in custody, the New York Times reported. Arrested and eventually released is guilty until proven innocent.
        umbra07 1y ago
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  > Deporting people who are in the country illegally is very much in line with the constitution You’re correct. But in a somewhat irrelevant way. The problem for most Americans aren’t the deportations. It’s the lack of due process, extrajudicial torture, and expansion of these police privileges to now encompassing all naturalised Americans.
cyanydeez 1y ago
yeah, it's more a question of "has america's justice system been reduced to arbitrary persecution of things the president or his executives deem a threat to America". Because that's basically what's unfolding under fascism means.
- jacquesm 1y ago
  That's a rhetorical question at this point.

by goku12 1y ago

account42 1y ago

[flagged]

JeanMara 1y ago
>Deporting people who are in the country illegally Oh? What about people who are permanent residents and are arbitrarily deemed "threat to national security" because of their opposition to Israel? What about the recent denaturalization DOJ unit that was just set up? Are those people "illegally" here too and that is constitutionally valid? The tunnel vision here is astounding. Do you really not realize that this administration isn't stopping at "just the illegals?" They have deported US citizens, children at that.
- rantallion 1y ago
  Indeed. GP needs to read "First They Came".
  - immibis 1y ago
    The HN voting record shows that HN broadly agrees with GGP (your GP). It makes sense, since people here are big tech developers, who will never come into contact in police in this kind of way.
  - catlover76 1y ago
    [dead]
zabzonk 1y ago
how about illegally deporting people?
thinkharderdev 1y ago
Deporting people who are in the country illegally is in line with the constitution. Deporting people without due process is not.
- ElevenLathe 1y ago
  Even this is stretching it. It's not as though the Andrew Jackson administration was doing deportations (besides the Trail of Tears, which was euphemistically referred to as a deportation campaign). The practice of criminalizing immigration enforcement didn't coincide with any amendment to the Constitution, which is itself only nominally even part of U.S. law anymore.
- Dig1t 1y ago
  Genuinely curious for a good faith answer: one administration allows tens of millions of people into the country during its term. You are saying that every individual is owed multiple court hearings, the full gamut which is usually used for people overstaying a visa or something. A system equipped to handle a relatively small number of people. The court system cannot possibly fulfill these tens of millions of cases in any reasonable time frame. These people will be in court for the rest of our lives and in the meantime they will have children and ultimately be allowed to stay forever by some future administration. Which is basically the same as just making them citizens. Do you have a proposed solution other than decades worth of court dates? It doesn’t really seem like the other side has a good faith solution to the problem other than just letting them all stay here forever. Or maybe I’m missing something and haven’t heard the other side’s arguments.
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y ago
    > Do you have a proposed solution other than decades worth of court dates? It doesn’t really seem like the other side has a good faith solution to the problem other than just letting them all stay here forever. I think we are at a point where we should accept that there will be decades of court dates. The real alternative is that anyone can be taken away because there would be no process for even a multi-generation born citizen to challenge the arrest. The real deterrent for it happening to such a citizen is reporting and publicity, which is increasingly seeming like it can be thwarted by a population that is primed to strip the humanity of those they disagree with. The way this is being handled, the timeline where we just let those 10 million stay in the country and avoid similar things in the future seems very appealing indeed. Two wrongs don’t make a right, as the saying goes.
djexjms 1y ago
What about ignoring due process while doing so? Is that, in your view, in line with the constitution? If it is, what recourse does a US citizen detained by ICE (either accidentally or not) have? Also, how do you view Trump's efforts to end birthright citizenship via Executive Order? Birthright citizenship is in the 14th Amendment. If the president is allowed to arbitrarily redefine who is and is not a citizen, are constitutional protections anything more than ink on paper?
moolcool 1y ago
What about deporting a student who is in the country legally as punishment writing an op-ed you don't like?
- mensetmanusman 1y ago
  America argues it is their right to assemble who they want in their borders.
  - nullstyle 1y ago
    Not America. The current administration and a select set of piss poor citizens
- Slamidan 1y ago
  as a guest that's the deal in most countries.
  - Tryk 1y ago
    What makes you say that?
  - breakyerself 1y ago
    Do you like freedom or not?
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    > that's the deal in most countries Most countries aren’t America.
    - buzzerbetrayed 1y ago
      So.. America can't protect American interests when deciding who should be in the country? If I went to Mexico and started protesting I would fully expect Mexico to send me home. And I'd support their right to do so.
pjc50 1y ago
Easy when a DOGE 21 year old can simply open up the SSN database and set your "legal resident?" flag to "no".
- cyanydeez 1y ago
  it's unlikely the original SS databased had any information about this. The new one they're building is clearly going to have all this bullshit so they can cherry pick at lightning speed reasons to exile, rendition or punish people. But just so we're clear, the SS doesn't really care if you're a citizen. All it's tracking is who pays into it and who receives the benefits from the payments.
  - pjc50 1y ago
    Yeah, I don't think the US actually has a reliable nationality status database other than those it's issued passports to. This may make the situation worse rather than better for those affected.
sorcerer-mar 1y ago
https://www.cato.org/blog/50-venezuelans-imprisoned-el-salvador-came-us-legally-never-violated-immigration-law https://www.cato.org/blog/50-venezuelans-imprisoned-el-salva... What about sending people who are here legally to a foreign torture camp (not "deporting", by the way) without due process? Is that in line with the Constitution? No. No it is not. Stop playing stupid. https://www.onthewing.org/user/Bonhoeffer%20-%20Theory%20of%20Stupidity.pdf https://www.onthewing.org/user/Bonhoeffer%20-%20Theory%20of%...
chasd00 1y ago
[flagged]
- breakyerself 1y ago
  As if that's the extent of things. As if the worst abuses of the Trump administration are just deporting people who were here illegally. Don't worry about the mass revocations of legal status of previously legal residents. The deprivation of due process. The sending of people to a foreign prison where they endure all kinds of human rights abuses based on flimsy evidence, no due proceas and no expectations of ever getting out alive. Fascist fucks
easyThrowaway 1y ago
They had people being deported while they were on the queue to renew their documents. US American born citizens were deported just because they "looked latinos". Your legal status is pretty much just in the eyes of whoever ICE agent you're gonna meet today.
- Dig1t 1y ago
  Is there proof of this? What’s the source? US citizens were deported because of their skin color? I think this is disinformation.
  - rawgabbit 1y ago
    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jun/16/los-angeles-immigration-raids-montebello https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jun/16/los-angeles-... https://www.wsj.com/us-news/ice-us-citizens-arrest-deportation-risk-580c67e6 https://www.wsj.com/us-news/ice-us-citizens-arrest-deportati...
    - Dig1t 1y ago
      >Gavidia was released >Eventually, the officers reviewed the identification in his wallet and released him I thought you said they were deported based on their skin color? Both of these articles seem to say the opposite of that.
      - bigbadfeline 1y ago
        Much selective quoting on your part, here is the other half of the truth: > Gavidia was released, but Javier Ramirez, another US citizen who is Gadivia’s friend and coworker, was detained by two agents, forced facedown on the ground and taken to federal detention, where he has remained in custody, the New York Times reported. Arrested and eventually released is guilty until proven innocent.
        umbra07 1y ago
JumpCrisscross 1y ago
> Deporting people who are in the country illegally is very much in line with the constitution You’re correct. But in a somewhat irrelevant way. The problem for most Americans aren’t the deportations. It’s the lack of due process, extrajudicial torture, and expansion of these police privileges to now encompassing all naturalised Americans.

cyanydeez 1y ago

yeah, it's more a question of "has america's justice system been reduced to arbitrary persecution of things the president or his executives deem a threat to America". Because that's basically what's unfolding under fascism means.

jacquesm 1y ago
That's a rhetorical question at this point.