3 ms·

How does this square with FOIA obligations? I get ICE sidestepping transparency by avoiding creating the responsive footage in the first place, but once the bod

by MertsA 2mo ago

How does this square with FOIA obligations? I get ICE sidestepping transparency by avoiding creating the responsive footage in the first place, but once the body cam footage exists, what basis could they use to withhold it other than redacting footage for the typical reasons?

orthecreedence 2mo ago
> what basis could they use to withhold it other than redacting footage for the typical reasons? The basis is "come and take it." A court order doesn't work on the brownshirts.
chaps 2mo ago
I mean, ICE is already sidestepping transparency by delaying FOIA requests to the Nth degree. Have a look: https://www.muckrock.com/foi/list/?page=1&per_page=100&agency=133&sort=date_submitted&order=desc https://www.muckrock.com/foi/list/?page=1&per_page=100&agenc...
jjav 2mo ago
> How does this square with FOIA obligations? ICE doesn't exactly have a track record of following any laws or courts in general. So I wouldn't expect them to answer any FOIA obligation. This is the fundamental flaw uncovered in the US system by the current administration. Turns out that if one agency decides to go rogue and declare that no laws apply to them, there is no mechanism in place to prevent that.
jauntywundrkind 2mo ago
Some people are calling it the administration with the biggest thumb-sucking babies of all time. Terrified little cowards, everywhere. Things they have said are a threat to national security that must be prevented: * Bodycam releases, broadly * Windmills * Not having a $400 grifted ballroom they had no approval for They'll probably say the same about the golf course Trump is trying to install, as he takes over jogging/biking/picnic spaces from DC's Haynes Point this fall. It's all made up. It's just an excuse to betray democracy, a cloak of darkness. Their own National Insecurity.
xtiansimon 2mo ago
“In April 2026, the Trump administration's Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion declaring the 1978 Presidential Records Act unconstitutional.” There is certainly an assault on government record keeping. Also there is an assault on non-partisan governmental employees. This administration is politicizing government at all levels — bureaucrats are losing their legal cover in the fight for compliance. Emily Bazelon of the Slate Political Gabfest talks about the federal government in legal cases is losing their _presumption of regularity_. Which is to say courts had previously dealt with justice department under the assumption they would follow laws and court orders. Not so much these days. Funny side note. I had a BS moving violation ticket. I called to request camera footage from the police vehicle. I was told how to request it and received in the mail a polite refusal stating it was being used in an ongoing investigation. Ha! Mine. (I did have a court date, no video, but I did win my case). https://americanoversight.org/investigation/presidential-records-act-lawsuit-transparency/ https://americanoversight.org/investigation/presidential-rec...

by MertsA 2mo ago

orthecreedence 2mo ago

> what basis could they use to withhold it other than redacting footage for the typical reasons? The basis is "come and take it." A court order doesn't work on the brownshirts.

chaps 2mo ago

I mean, ICE is already sidestepping transparency by delaying FOIA requests to the Nth degree. Have a look: https://www.muckrock.com/foi/list/?page=1&per_page=100&agency=133&sort=date_submitted&order=desc https://www.muckrock.com/foi/list/?page=1&per_page=100&agenc...

jjav 2mo ago

> How does this square with FOIA obligations? ICE doesn't exactly have a track record of following any laws or courts in general. So I wouldn't expect them to answer any FOIA obligation. This is the fundamental flaw uncovered in the US system by the current administration. Turns out that if one agency decides to go rogue and declare that no laws apply to them, there is no mechanism in place to prevent that.

jauntywundrkind 2mo ago

Some people are calling it the administration with the biggest thumb-sucking babies of all time. Terrified little cowards, everywhere. Things they have said are a threat to national security that must be prevented: * Bodycam releases, broadly * Windmills * Not having a $400 grifted ballroom they had no approval for They'll probably say the same about the golf course Trump is trying to install, as he takes over jogging/biking/picnic spaces from DC's Haynes Point this fall. It's all made up. It's just an excuse to betray democracy, a cloak of darkness. Their own National Insecurity.

xtiansimon 2mo ago

“In April 2026, the Trump administration's Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion declaring the 1978 Presidential Records Act unconstitutional.” There is certainly an assault on government record keeping. Also there is an assault on non-partisan governmental employees. This administration is politicizing government at all levels — bureaucrats are losing their legal cover in the fight for compliance. Emily Bazelon of the Slate Political Gabfest talks about the federal government in legal cases is losing their _presumption of regularity_. Which is to say courts had previously dealt with justice department under the assumption they would follow laws and court orders. Not so much these days. Funny side note. I had a BS moving violation ticket. I called to request camera footage from the police vehicle. I was told how to request it and received in the mail a polite refusal stating it was being used in an ongoing investigation. Ha! Mine. (I did have a court date, no video, but I did win my case). https://americanoversight.org/investigation/presidential-records-act-lawsuit-transparency/ https://americanoversight.org/investigation/presidential-rec...