6 ms·
If I'm reading this correctly, they're just straight up violating the law. They're sharing information with ICE under an obligation to share information of alie
by SilverBirch 8mo ago
If I'm reading this correctly, they're just straight up violating the law. They're sharing information with ICE under an obligation to share information of aliens, but they're actually sharing everyone's information in an effort to identify aliens. That seems like a pretty slam shut case if there were any mechanism to investigate and prosecute it.
- drstewart 8mo agoWhere did you read they're sharing everyone's information?
- JumpCrisscross 8mo ago> I'm reading this correctly, they're just straight up violating the law HHS says “under the Immigration and Nationality Act, ‘any information in any records kept by any department or agency of the government as to the identity and location of aliens in the US shall be made available to’ immigration authorities.” If that’s true, they’re following the law.
- globalise83 8mo agoKey part of what you wrote: "as to the identity and location of aliens" - so whatever claim they have to access health information applies to aliens. The big question is: are they harvesting citizens' health records illegally as part of this effort, and if so, when do those responsible see jail time?
- JumpCrisscross 8mo ago> are they harvesting citizens' health records illegally as part of this effort, and if so, when do those responsible see jail time? I’m honestly curious if this would be a Privacy Act or HIPAA violation. The article seems to be unsure on this.
- bonsai_spool 8mo agoI’m also unsure, but I haven’t understood HIPAA to constrain governmental actions. It’s a short law so I will review it (not a lawyer all the same).
- creshal 8mo agoThey're unsure because a lot depends on the legal status of children born to non-citizen parents in the US after a executive order tried to revoke birthright citizenship: https://www.bmj.com/content/390/bmj.r1538 https://www.bmj.com/content/390/bmj.r1538 If that EO was legal, then sharing the data is, too. If it wasn't, then it's probably a privacy violation, but the CMS isn't allowed to make that call themselves, they have to rely on court decisions for it. And challenging EOs is not trivial.
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- lrvick 8mo agoIt has become quite clear in recent months that the the rule of law will not be enforced on the federal government or their allies.
- thomaspinchone 8mo agoit's been quite clear for about 50 years now
- delecti 8mo agoMaybe, but there was also clearly an inflection point just over 12 months ago, and another 8 years prior.
- mrexcess 8mo agoFor me it was when Eric Holder, the Attorney General under President Obama, straight-up ignored a Congressional subpoena. Maybe the actual event happened earlier than that, but in that moment I marked "rule of law" as a dead letter.
- filoeleven 8mo ago2000 election decided by the Supreme Court here. Will never forget the phrase "hanging chads."
- rwmj 8mo agoSelectively ... Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.
- gorgoiler 8mo agoI heard a law professor on NPR a few nights back saying how, at the executive level, the rule of law is dead and has been for some time. They cited Jan 6 but recognised how politically divisive that example was, so also gave the failure to enforce the TikTok ban as a less partisan example. If you take your hands off the wheel you can go a surprisingly long time before you crash. This hands-free period will have to come to an end at some point.
- juujian 8mo ago> if there were any mechanism to investigate and prosecute it. If only there was an independent Judikative or something idk...
- netsharc 8mo agoYeah, power to execute laws is given to the executive branch. Power of the executive is bestowed upon... one person. From https://archive.is/E6zXj https://archive.is/E6zXj : > But, as Chayes studied the graft of the Karzai government, she concluded that it was anything but benign. Many in the political élite were not merely stealing reconstruction money but expropriating farmland from other Afghans. Warlords could hoodwink U.S. special forces into dispatching their adversaries by feeding the Americans intelligence tips about supposed Taliban ties. Many of those who made money from the largesse of the international community enjoyed a sideline in the drug trade. Afghanistan is often described as a “failed state,” but, in light of the outright thievery on display, Chayes began to reassess the problem. This wasn’t a situation in which the Afghan government was earnestly trying, but failing, to serve its people. The government was actually succeeding, albeit at “another objective altogether”—the enrichment of its own members.
- JumpCrisscross 8mo ago> Power of the executive is bestowed upon... one person This is the unitary executive theory. It’s a novel Constitutional theory that even this SCOTUS seems reluctant to honestly embrace.
- TSiege 8mo agoThey are not reluctant
- JumpCrisscross 8mo ago> They are not reluctant Read the Fed case transcripts.
- reenorap 8mo agoI thought undocumented migrants weren’t allowed to use Medicare or Medicaid. How is that data useful to track them down, then?
- JumpCrisscross 8mo agoHHS is broader than CMMS. Someone who was formerly legal could now be illegal. But more prominently, Miller and Noem have focused on illegally deporting pending asylum cases to juice their numbers. Those folks may show up in HHS (and IRS) data.
- reenorap 8mo agoI’m against using health data to benefit ICE but what you’re saying doesn’t make sense. There needs to be a critical mass of data for it to be useful to Palantir. If they are passing Medicare and Medicaid data, does that mean that undocumented migrants are getting Medicare and Medicaid?
- JumpCrisscross 8mo ago> If they are passing Medicare and Medicaid data It’s not. Palantir “receives peoples’ addresses from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)” [1]. That’s broader than Medicare or Medicaid. If you’re on a legal visa and have to get a prescription filled, I think you’ll wind up in those data. (Same if you are legally on Medicare with a spouse who overstayed their visa.) > does that mean that undocumented migrants are getting Medicare and Medicaid? Not necessarily. As I said, these data are broader than CMMS. And the targets of the current ICE are not undocumented migrants. (I live in Wyoming, near the Idaho border. The farm workers are fine.) [1] https://www.404media.co/elite-the-palantir-app-ice-uses-to-find-neighborhoods-to-raid/ https://www.404media.co/elite-the-palantir-app-ice-uses-to-f...
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- 8mo ago
- snarf21 8mo ago"If a cop follows you for 500 miles, you're going to get a ticket". - Warren Buffet 'Show me the man, I’ll find you the crime'. - Lavrentiy Beria (Stalin secret police)
- ClarityJones 8mo agoI'm open to either conclusion, but what law / right do you think is being violated? As a general rule, the first amendment protects the right to say, e.g. "John Doe lives at 123 Main St." John may not like that people know that, but that doesn't generally limit other peoples' right to speak freely.
- SilverBirch 8mo agoIt's right there in the article, there are specific federal laws authorizing them to make specific information available - for example, they can make any record kept about the identity or location of aliens available. Right, that's a specific limitation on what they can share, even the HHS spokesperson made clear they don't share information on US citizens and permanent lawful residents. But then the article goes on to reveal that ICE has all the personal data of every person receiving Medicaid. If the law says you can share aliens information, but not Americans information, and then you do share Americans information I think you're probably breaking the law, and at the very least there should be a process to find out what the basis is for you doing it. Normally these things would be decided by a court.
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- lawn 8mo agoPlease stop using the word alien to refer to humans. It's dehumanizing and it leads to a path where you can justify humiliating, torturing, and murdering other humans. Which is already happening with ICE.
- JumpCrisscross 8mo ago> Please stop using the word alien to refer to humans It’s the legally-correct term. For what it’s worth, I’m a naturalized American. When I was doing my citizenship paperwork, I found the term fun. The word doesn’t dehumanize. Murdering people does.
- lawn 8mo agoGenocide starts with separating people into them and us, and this process starts with words.
- JumpCrisscross 8mo ago> Genocide starts with separating people into them and us This is an unsubstantiated slippery slope. We can categorize people, even sort them by desirability for some purpose, without resorting to dehumanization much less genocide. (Citizenship and immigration necessitate an us-them delineation. So do team sports, families and like club memberships. Us and them are fine. Us versus them is dangerous.)
- lawn 8mo agoIt's not enough by itself of course, but in the US it's very much a "us versus them" if you haven't noticed.
- hakrgrl 8mo agoYou are not reading this right. > There is no data sharing agreement between CMS and DHS on “US citizens and lawful permanent residents,” they added.
- JumpCrisscross 8mo agoWhich doesn’t quite say those data weren’t shared.