2 ms·

the only way to legally search a house, car or force companies to hand anything over is with a judge signing it off the article isn't clear about it but it imp

the only way to legally search a house, car or force companies to hand anything over is with a judge signing it off the article isn't clear about it but it implies that this was not approved by a judge but DHS alone, this is also indicated but the fact that the supona contained a gag order but Google still informed the affected person that _some_ information was hanged over now some level of cooperation with law enforcement even without a judge is normal to reduce friction and if you love in a proper state of law there is no problem Keith it. Also companies are to some degree required to cooperate. What makes this case so problematic is the amount of information shared without a judge order, that ICE tried to gag Google, that Google did delay compliance to give the affected person a chance to take legal action even through they could, and last but but least that this information seems to have been requested for retaliation against protestor which is a big no go for a state of law

dmix 8mo ago
Apparently around 300 students have been deported over pro-Palestine activism, similar to the person in the article who self-deported https://www.themarshallproject.org/2025/04/05/visa-immigration-first-amendment-protest-speech https://www.themarshallproject.org/2025/04/05/visa-immigrati... > Legally, the answer is murky, one expert told The Washington Post — at least when it comes to combing through Supreme Court decisions for answers. The court has been clear that First Amendment protections from criminal or civil penalties for speech apply to citizens and noncitizens alike. What’s less settled, however, is how those protections apply in the immigration context, where the executive branch has broad discretion to detain or deport.
- dathinab 8mo ago
  The law is both in wording and spirit pretty clear that - any civilian has a right for free speech, and protests count as that - any civilian has a right for due process There is nothing murky about that. There are just people pretending it's murky (in this and many other cases) to systematically undermine the US constitution. Which is a huge problem (beyond this specific case and made much worse by the state of current supreme court).
- tick_tock_tick 8mo ago
  Why is this a bad thing? It's just like India kicking out those two tourists for political signs. I can't see any benefit at all to allowing tourist or student visas is this case to participate in "activism". https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/india-orders-british-tourists-leave-123909922.html?utm_source=referral&utm_medium=offthepress&utm_campaign=home&guccounter=1 https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/india-orders-british-tou...
  - snake42 8mo ago
    Non-citizens have constitutional rights as well. The DHS having the ability to produce subpoenas without judicial oversight is definitely a bad thing.
    - tick_tock_tick 8mo ago
      Sure, their rights will not be violated. They will not be jailed for their activism just removed/banned from the country.
      - snake42 8mo ago
        How does that not violate their right to freedom of speech and assembly?
  - ropetin 8mo ago
    If I'm reading you right, you're saying if one country does something bad, that makes it OK for another country to do the same? You can likely find a country in the world doing any heinous thing you can think of, so is everything on the table? What about positive things? Lots of countries have socialized medicine, so by your logic doesn't that mean the US should, too? And if you think activism is bad for non-residents (non-citizens?) who do you think should decide what constitutes activism? A student goes to a pro-Israel rally, is that deportable activism? A tourist goes to an 'adopt-a-puppy' event at a no-kill shelter and donates $10, is that deportable activism?
    - 8mo ago

dmix 8mo ago

Apparently around 300 students have been deported over pro-Palestine activism, similar to the person in the article who self-deported https://www.themarshallproject.org/2025/04/05/visa-immigration-first-amendment-protest-speech https://www.themarshallproject.org/2025/04/05/visa-immigrati... > Legally, the answer is murky, one expert told The Washington Post — at least when it comes to combing through Supreme Court decisions for answers. The court has been clear that First Amendment protections from criminal or civil penalties for speech apply to citizens and noncitizens alike. What’s less settled, however, is how those protections apply in the immigration context, where the executive branch has broad discretion to detain or deport.

dathinab 8mo ago
The law is both in wording and spirit pretty clear that - any civilian has a right for free speech, and protests count as that - any civilian has a right for due process There is nothing murky about that. There are just people pretending it's murky (in this and many other cases) to systematically undermine the US constitution. Which is a huge problem (beyond this specific case and made much worse by the state of current supreme court).
tick_tock_tick 8mo ago
Why is this a bad thing? It's just like India kicking out those two tourists for political signs. I can't see any benefit at all to allowing tourist or student visas is this case to participate in "activism". https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/india-orders-british-tourists-leave-123909922.html?utm_source=referral&utm_medium=offthepress&utm_campaign=home&guccounter=1 https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/india-orders-british-tou...
- snake42 8mo ago
  Non-citizens have constitutional rights as well. The DHS having the ability to produce subpoenas without judicial oversight is definitely a bad thing.
  - tick_tock_tick 8mo ago
    Sure, their rights will not be violated. They will not be jailed for their activism just removed/banned from the country.
    - snake42 8mo ago
      How does that not violate their right to freedom of speech and assembly?
- ropetin 8mo ago
  If I'm reading you right, you're saying if one country does something bad, that makes it OK for another country to do the same? You can likely find a country in the world doing any heinous thing you can think of, so is everything on the table? What about positive things? Lots of countries have socialized medicine, so by your logic doesn't that mean the US should, too? And if you think activism is bad for non-residents (non-citizens?) who do you think should decide what constitutes activism? A student goes to a pro-Israel rally, is that deportable activism? A tourist goes to an 'adopt-a-puppy' event at a no-kill shelter and donates $10, is that deportable activism?
  - 8mo ago