5 ms·

> Nonviolent crowd control does not seem to be a core competence of these federal forces. Why is crowd control even needed? ICE existed for many, many years b

> Nonviolent crowd control does not seem to be a core competence of these federal forces. Why is crowd control even needed? ICE existed for many, many years before now, and them doing their job never caused crowds previously (under both R and D administrations), so what (rhetorically) changed?

estearum 9mo ago
Oh this is easy: a gigantic funding increase is being used to massively expand workforce with minimal training, then that workforce is being deployed with an ambiguous mission and apparent arrest quotas, while also being told they’re immune from any criminal liability for their actions (they’re not), including internal memos telling them they’re allowed to enter private homes without judicial warrants (they’re not), and a SCOTUS decision that is being represented to mean that racial profiling is legal now (it's not) Deploying literal hordes of poorly trained, well-armed men onto American streets with explicit guidance that runs directly contrary to the US Constitution's plain text can, will, and SHOULD attract crowds in opposition. Hope that helps!
- steveBK123 9mo ago
  It's completely intentional choice by the Miller/Noem wing of the admin to create media drama and "own the libs", overriding the Homan wing which was pushing for easy wins rounding up known criminal offenders in custody / in red states / etc.
toast0 9mo ago
Didn't ICE and predecessor organizations do workplace raids? Maybe that's not as big of a crowd, but it's still a crowd. I think they would tend to do workplace raids in concert with the FBI.
solid_fuel 9mo ago
There's a big difference between seeing an immigration raid where you know whoever gets picked up is going to have access to a lawyer, be subject to proper due process, and at worst be sent back to their home country. We knew - or at least believed - that if they detained someone who was a citizen, that person would be released. Now, when we see ICE grabbing someone, we know that person probably won't have access to legal representation even if they are here legally, even if they're a citizen. We know they might be sent to a concentration camp in a foreign country they aren't from, and we know they might even get murdered in the street. It's a very different dynamic.
- hubber 9mo ago
  [flagged]
  - estearum 9mo ago
    Huh? We have no reason to believe e.g. Kilmar Abrego Garcia was non-compliant in any way with anything, and he was sent to a foreign torture prison without access to a lawyer, without being charged with a crime, without being afforded basic rights that everyone (citizen or not) has under the US Constitution. We have numerous examples of people who have followed all legal procedures and have legal status in the US who were likewise denied basic Constitutional protections. Here are a few relevant sources: https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/2025-04/FIRE%20Ozturk%20Filed%20Amicus.pdf https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/2025-04/FIRE%20Ozt... 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...
  - deeg 9mo ago
    If you aren't afraid you must be white. ICE has been arresting citizens because they fit racial profiles: https://apnews.com/article/minnesota-immigration-us-citizen-detained-hmong-d009590a491c0c8243ef21ef24db7182 https://apnews.com/article/minnesota-immigration-us-citizen-...
  - subdude 9mo ago
    "There are tens of millions of people in the country illegally. They must go." Why?
    - deleted 9mo ago
      [deleted]
  - throw0101c 9mo ago
    > And I'll celebrate with my lawyer if it does. LOL. Why do you assume you'll get a hearing? As Timothy Snyder (an historian of Central and Eastern Europe, the Soviet Union, and the Holocaust) observed last year: > If you accept that non-citizens have no right to due process, you are accepting that citizens have no right to due process. All the government has to do is claim that you are not a citizen; without due process you have no chance to prove the contrary. * https://xcancel.com/TimothyDSnyder/status/1904296565562343430#m https://xcancel.com/TimothyDSnyder/status/190429656556234343...
deeg 9mo ago
Because ICE has gone way beyond arresting illegals. In Boston, for example, they stopped a naturalization ceremony literally minutes before people were to become citizens. Do you support that? https://www.wcvb.com/article/21-citizenship-oaths-canceled-faneuil-hall/69756591 https://www.wcvb.com/article/21-citizenship-oaths-canceled-f...
- etchalon 9mo ago
  Bigotry, mostly. It's usually bigotry.
jaredklewis 9mo ago
Well they didn’t wear masks and grab people off the street and shoved them into unmarked vans under previous administrations.
- Jsebast24 9mo ago
  [flagged]
  - locopati 9mo ago
    Is it really a problem though?
    - mritterhoff 9mo ago
      It seems to be, given how many people voted for "mass deportations". It also makes it easier for employers to get away with poor working conditions for those workers.
  - estearum 9mo ago
    Nope. While there was a large increase in immigrant inflows, there is no evidence their enforcement decisions were significantly different than e.g. Trump 1. What the statistics actually show is that the United States was a far more attractive destination for immigrants under Biden, but that enforcement policies were largely the same. That makes sense since enforcement policy is mostly set by Congress and not by POTUS. The increased appeal of the US is entirely explained by the fact that the US economy was excelling far beyond any country in the world, and especially any country in the western hemisphere. At the same time, Central and South America were getting hit by successive political and economic shocks amplified by COVID. The significant reduction in immigrants towards the tail end of Biden is not because they suddenly decided to "follow the law" and "close the border." It's that they decided NOT to follow the law anymore and to unilaterally ignore the asylum laws that Congress actually sets. This was later struck down in court: https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/district-court-strikes-down-restrictions-in-biden-era-rule-severely-limiting-asylum https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/district-court-strikes-d... So really what you're seeing is the difference between the US being a desirable place to come to versus an undesirable one. I'm sympathetic to the argument that there's moral hazard involved in making the US appear to be highly desirable to people who we don't want to accept, but I'm not sympathetic at all to the view that that means the executive can simply ignore whatever laws they want, or they can turn the US into such a dystopian hellhole that only the most desperate immigrants around would bother attempting entry. Some additional sources: https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/biden-deportation-record https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/biden-deportation-re... https://www.cato.org/blog/data-show-trump-wouldve-released-many-border-crossers-biden https://www.cato.org/blog/data-show-trump-wouldve-released-m...
ndsipa_pomu 9mo ago
They were co-opted to function as Trump's death squads to kill dissidents
JKCalhoun 9mo ago
I think it changed when I saw they were sending people to (apparently rape/torture) prisons in El Salvador with no due process.
mindslight 9mo ago
Exactly. There should be no crowd control, because they shouldn't be interacting with the American public except as fellow citizens. If someone commits a crime against them, they can turn the details over to the local police for enforcement of assault, etc. At this point after how they've been operating, they shouldn't even be allowed to carry weapons. No guns, no grenades, no pepper spray, no masks to escape accountability. These are supposed to be public servants, they should be accountable to the public. If someone they're trying to apprehend reacts violently then they can escalate the situation to the local police or maybe the FBI after the federal agencies have done the work of regaining the public trust.
claudiulodro 9mo ago
Before now, ICE was primarily paperwork police. Border patrol and occasional visits to round up undocumented immigrants at factories still existed, but the vast majority of their job was related to like customs and visa forms. It's like hiring 10x the postal workers and giving them guns and "qualified immunity" -- you're going to get some new problems.

estearum 9mo ago

Oh this is easy: a gigantic funding increase is being used to massively expand workforce with minimal training, then that workforce is being deployed with an ambiguous mission and apparent arrest quotas, while also being told they’re immune from any criminal liability for their actions (they’re not), including internal memos telling them they’re allowed to enter private homes without judicial warrants (they’re not), and a SCOTUS decision that is being represented to mean that racial profiling is legal now (it's not) Deploying literal hordes of poorly trained, well-armed men onto American streets with explicit guidance that runs directly contrary to the US Constitution's plain text can, will, and SHOULD attract crowds in opposition. Hope that helps!

steveBK123 9mo ago
It's completely intentional choice by the Miller/Noem wing of the admin to create media drama and "own the libs", overriding the Homan wing which was pushing for easy wins rounding up known criminal offenders in custody / in red states / etc.

toast0 9mo ago

Didn't ICE and predecessor organizations do workplace raids? Maybe that's not as big of a crowd, but it's still a crowd. I think they would tend to do workplace raids in concert with the FBI.

solid_fuel 9mo ago

There's a big difference between seeing an immigration raid where you know whoever gets picked up is going to have access to a lawyer, be subject to proper due process, and at worst be sent back to their home country. We knew - or at least believed - that if they detained someone who was a citizen, that person would be released. Now, when we see ICE grabbing someone, we know that person probably won't have access to legal representation even if they are here legally, even if they're a citizen. We know they might be sent to a concentration camp in a foreign country they aren't from, and we know they might even get murdered in the street. It's a very different dynamic.

hubber 9mo ago
[flagged]
- estearum 9mo ago
  Huh? We have no reason to believe e.g. Kilmar Abrego Garcia was non-compliant in any way with anything, and he was sent to a foreign torture prison without access to a lawyer, without being charged with a crime, without being afforded basic rights that everyone (citizen or not) has under the US Constitution. We have numerous examples of people who have followed all legal procedures and have legal status in the US who were likewise denied basic Constitutional protections. Here are a few relevant sources: https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/2025-04/FIRE%20Ozturk%20Filed%20Amicus.pdf https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/2025-04/FIRE%20Ozt... 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...
- deeg 9mo ago
  If you aren't afraid you must be white. ICE has been arresting citizens because they fit racial profiles: https://apnews.com/article/minnesota-immigration-us-citizen-detained-hmong-d009590a491c0c8243ef21ef24db7182 https://apnews.com/article/minnesota-immigration-us-citizen-...
- subdude 9mo ago
  "There are tens of millions of people in the country illegally. They must go." Why?
  - deleted 9mo ago
    [deleted]
- throw0101c 9mo ago
  > And I'll celebrate with my lawyer if it does. LOL. Why do you assume you'll get a hearing? As Timothy Snyder (an historian of Central and Eastern Europe, the Soviet Union, and the Holocaust) observed last year: > If you accept that non-citizens have no right to due process, you are accepting that citizens have no right to due process. All the government has to do is claim that you are not a citizen; without due process you have no chance to prove the contrary. * https://xcancel.com/TimothyDSnyder/status/1904296565562343430#m https://xcancel.com/TimothyDSnyder/status/190429656556234343...

deeg 9mo ago

Because ICE has gone way beyond arresting illegals. In Boston, for example, they stopped a naturalization ceremony literally minutes before people were to become citizens. Do you support that? https://www.wcvb.com/article/21-citizenship-oaths-canceled-faneuil-hall/69756591 https://www.wcvb.com/article/21-citizenship-oaths-canceled-f...

etchalon 9mo ago
Bigotry, mostly. It's usually bigotry.

jaredklewis 9mo ago

Well they didn’t wear masks and grab people off the street and shoved them into unmarked vans under previous administrations.

Jsebast24 9mo ago
[flagged]
- locopati 9mo ago
  Is it really a problem though?
  - mritterhoff 9mo ago
    It seems to be, given how many people voted for "mass deportations". It also makes it easier for employers to get away with poor working conditions for those workers.
- estearum 9mo ago
  Nope. While there was a large increase in immigrant inflows, there is no evidence their enforcement decisions were significantly different than e.g. Trump 1. What the statistics actually show is that the United States was a far more attractive destination for immigrants under Biden, but that enforcement policies were largely the same. That makes sense since enforcement policy is mostly set by Congress and not by POTUS. The increased appeal of the US is entirely explained by the fact that the US economy was excelling far beyond any country in the world, and especially any country in the western hemisphere. At the same time, Central and South America were getting hit by successive political and economic shocks amplified by COVID. The significant reduction in immigrants towards the tail end of Biden is not because they suddenly decided to "follow the law" and "close the border." It's that they decided NOT to follow the law anymore and to unilaterally ignore the asylum laws that Congress actually sets. This was later struck down in court: https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/district-court-strikes-down-restrictions-in-biden-era-rule-severely-limiting-asylum https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/district-court-strikes-d... So really what you're seeing is the difference between the US being a desirable place to come to versus an undesirable one. I'm sympathetic to the argument that there's moral hazard involved in making the US appear to be highly desirable to people who we don't want to accept, but I'm not sympathetic at all to the view that that means the executive can simply ignore whatever laws they want, or they can turn the US into such a dystopian hellhole that only the most desperate immigrants around would bother attempting entry. Some additional sources: https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/biden-deportation-record https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/biden-deportation-re... https://www.cato.org/blog/data-show-trump-wouldve-released-many-border-crossers-biden https://www.cato.org/blog/data-show-trump-wouldve-released-m...

ndsipa_pomu 9mo ago

They were co-opted to function as Trump's death squads to kill dissidents

JKCalhoun 9mo ago

I think it changed when I saw they were sending people to (apparently rape/torture) prisons in El Salvador with no due process.

mindslight 9mo ago

Exactly. There should be no crowd control, because they shouldn't be interacting with the American public except as fellow citizens. If someone commits a crime against them, they can turn the details over to the local police for enforcement of assault, etc. At this point after how they've been operating, they shouldn't even be allowed to carry weapons. No guns, no grenades, no pepper spray, no masks to escape accountability. These are supposed to be public servants, they should be accountable to the public. If someone they're trying to apprehend reacts violently then they can escalate the situation to the local police or maybe the FBI after the federal agencies have done the work of regaining the public trust.

claudiulodro 9mo ago

Before now, ICE was primarily paperwork police. Border patrol and occasional visits to round up undocumented immigrants at factories still existed, but the vast majority of their job was related to like customs and visa forms. It's like hiring 10x the postal workers and giving them guns and "qualified immunity" -- you're going to get some new problems.