One of the more eerie aspects of the ICE "breaking-and-entering" memo is the furtive manner in which the contents and import are promulgated...supervisors and agents are given a quick peek at the memo, and then asked to promptly return it, as if to insulate the higher command from direct responsibility.
"No, that's not what we meant...", as agents use a battering ram to gain entrance to peoples' home, and snatch them away half-dressed.
These tactics, "authorized" by the much derided "administrative warrant", take us back to pre-Revolutionary America, where British soldiers could break down doors and raid private property at their discretion, actions that help fuel uprisings ultimately leading to war against the colonizers.
Well, it's time to go to war, in whatever guise, in order to preserve our liberties, guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, but now hanging by a thread.
And the courts? As pointed out by David, the trumpy 8th CA promptly issued a stay against District Court Judge Kate Menendez's TRO banning ICE/CBP use of pepper-spraying peaceful protestors, among other restraints imposed on agents, so it's back to business as usual, as we see in videos taken yesterday of protestors pinned to the ground, whilst getting blasted in the face point-blank with the noxious spray.
So, now what? Who's safeguarding 1st and 4th Amendment rights? Are these lost according to which judicial districts these unconstitutional crimes are taking place? What a shit-show!
Can agents be held accountable for breaking the law by doing these entries? As in Mark Kelly telling the miltray to disobey illegal orders? Secondly, pardon my cynicism, but is Kavanaugh thining about his investments and money with his sudden concern with presidential overreach? Why now? Why this time?
Phenomenal reporting on this. The detail about supervisors showing the memo breifly then taking it back is wild, like they knew exactly how damaging it would be if exposed. I worked in compliance for a bit and this kind of verbal-only dissemination is a huge red flag. Its basically an admission that the policy cant survive sunlight. Whistleblowers taking real risks here to surface this stuff.
One of the more eerie aspects of the ICE "breaking-and-entering" memo is the furtive manner in which the contents and import are promulgated...supervisors and agents are given a quick peek at the memo, and then asked to promptly return it, as if to insulate the higher command from direct responsibility.
"No, that's not what we meant...", as agents use a battering ram to gain entrance to peoples' home, and snatch them away half-dressed.
These tactics, "authorized" by the much derided "administrative warrant", take us back to pre-Revolutionary America, where British soldiers could break down doors and raid private property at their discretion, actions that help fuel uprisings ultimately leading to war against the colonizers.
Well, it's time to go to war, in whatever guise, in order to preserve our liberties, guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, but now hanging by a thread.
And the courts? As pointed out by David, the trumpy 8th CA promptly issued a stay against District Court Judge Kate Menendez's TRO banning ICE/CBP use of pepper-spraying peaceful protestors, among other restraints imposed on agents, so it's back to business as usual, as we see in videos taken yesterday of protestors pinned to the ground, whilst getting blasted in the face point-blank with the noxious spray.
So, now what? Who's safeguarding 1st and 4th Amendment rights? Are these lost according to which judicial districts these unconstitutional crimes are taking place? What a shit-show!
Can agents be held accountable for breaking the law by doing these entries? As in Mark Kelly telling the miltray to disobey illegal orders? Secondly, pardon my cynicism, but is Kavanaugh thining about his investments and money with his sudden concern with presidential overreach? Why now? Why this time?
Phenomenal reporting on this. The detail about supervisors showing the memo breifly then taking it back is wild, like they knew exactly how damaging it would be if exposed. I worked in compliance for a bit and this kind of verbal-only dissemination is a huge red flag. Its basically an admission that the policy cant survive sunlight. Whistleblowers taking real risks here to surface this stuff.