Immigrant Concentration Camps

[Patooka]

"Or we could just stop arresting people and imprisoning them unlawfully without due process" seems a good alternative, too. It's not a trivial manner to get abducted and put in a concentration camp for "walking north while brown".

You just don't get it do you? WTF does colour or race has to do with anything? These people are trying to enter another sovereign country illegally! What would you suggest the authorities should do, chaffour them in limos to wherever they want to go and perhaps handed a satchel full of money?

And give them blowjobs. Don't forget the the blowjobs.

 

[angelo]

"Or we could just stop arresting people and imprisoning them unlawfully without due process" seems a good alternative, too. It's not a trivial manner to get abducted and put in a concentration camp for "walking north while brown".

You just don't get it do you? WTF does colour or race has to do with anything? These people are trying to enter another sovereign country illegally! What would you suggest the authorities should do, chaffour them in limos to wherever they want to go and perhaps handed a satchel full of money?

"These people" are US citizens traveling to a soccer match in the US, from their home in the US. They are not trying to enter any other sovereign country, and I suggest that the authorities obey the constitution they are sworn to uphold.

Why the fuck you think that any other response is even vaguely acceptable I do not know. But I have very strong suspicions.

Aren't we discussing illegal immigrants? WTF said anything about US citizens getting arrested for wanting to go home?

 

[KeepTalking]

Horsecrap. ICE are constitutionally prohibited from demanding his documents in the first place. Therefore there cannot be any wrongdoing on his part by presenting them with anything, or nothing - no matter how misleading it might be to them.

Documents that you are not allowed to examine cannot be 'false' in any reasonable sense.

What false documents? I haven't heard anything about his documents being false.

I don't know all the details but he did have some false stuff--his mother trying to hide her illegal status.

From what I have read he did not have anything of the sort. The ICE agents who arrested him claimed he had forged documents because they did not believe he was a US citizen, so did not accept his identification as being legitimate, when in fact it was. I am not sure what his mother's immigration status has to do with anything.

 

[bilby]

"These people" are US citizens traveling to a soccer match in the US, from their home in the US. They are not trying to enter any other sovereign country, and I suggest that the authorities obey the constitution they are sworn to uphold.

Why the fuck you think that any other response is even vaguely acceptable I do not know. But I have very strong suspicions.

Aren't we discussing illegal immigrants? WTF said anything about US citizens getting arrested for wanting to go home?

So you have very strong opinions, but haven't actually read the OP, the thread, or the story on which it is based?

Why doesn't this surprise me?

The US citizens were detained while traveling wholly within the US.

Nobody was "wanting to go home". They left their home (in the US) to go to a soccer camp (also in the US). And were detained by ICE because they couldn't show papers that (in the opinion of the ICE officials involved) proved their US citizenship. Which, according to the fourth amendment of the constitution of the United States, they don't have to be able to show to anyone who doesn't have probable cause.

 

[Jarhyn]

"These people" are US citizens traveling to a soccer match in the US, from their home in the US. They are not trying to enter any other sovereign country, and I suggest that the authorities obey the constitution they are sworn to uphold.

Why the fuck you think that any other response is even vaguely acceptable I do not know. But I have very strong suspicions.

Aren't we discussing illegal immigrants? WTF said anything about US citizens getting arrested for wanting to go home?

So you have very strong opinions, but haven't actually read the OP, the thread, or the story on which it is based?

Why doesn't this surprise me?

The US citizens were detained while traveling wholly within the US.

Nobody was "wanting to go home". They left their home (in the US) to go to a soccer camp (also in the US). And were detained by ICE because they couldn't show papers that (in the opinion of the ICE officials involved) proved their US citizenship. Which, according to the fourth amendment of the constitution of the United States, they don't have to be able to show to anyone who doesn't have probable cause.

Their 'probable cause' was "they were brown and walking north". Or in other words, rank racism.

 

[Gun Nut]

If compensation has to be paid to every person ever wrongly arrested, no mater how trivial the matter, it would cost taxpayers billions which could be used for far more useful purposes, like housing genuine homeless and destitute American legal citizens.

Alternately, law enforcement would be a lot more careful about arrest first and ask questions later.

However, in this situation I don't think he is owed any compensation because of the false documents. Even though he wasn't illegal neither was he arrested for no fault of his own.

Horsecrap. ICE are constitutionally prohibited from demanding his documents in the first place. Therefore there cannot be any wrongdoing on his part by presenting them with anything, or nothing - no matter how misleading it might be to them.

Documents that you are not allowed to examine cannot be 'false' in any reasonable sense.

Bilby, is that like how Trump cannot be guilty of obstruction because there was no crime to obstruct? Providing false documents (not that this person did, just responding to your point) is illegal. But you are implying that it should not be illegal because they shouldn't have been asked for in the first place. I just can't help but draw a connection to that about obstruction / no crime.

 

[Jarhyn]

Horsecrap. ICE are constitutionally prohibited from demanding his documents in the first place. Therefore there cannot be any wrongdoing on his part by presenting them with anything, or nothing - no matter how misleading it might be to them.

Documents that you are not allowed to examine cannot be 'false' in any reasonable sense.

Bilby, is that like how Trump cannot be guilty of obstruction because there was no crime to obstruct? Providing false documents (not that this person did, just responding to your point) is illegal. But you are implying that it should not be illegal because they shouldn't have been asked for in the first place. I just can't help but draw a connection to that about obstruction / no crime.

In the obstruction case, differently from this one (and this is a really important difference), there is a "fruit of the poison tree" doctrine. So your attempt to draw a parallel is spurious: in one, a crime was committed visibly against law enforcement who were doing their job legally, full stop. In the other, a crime was committed by law enforcement against a citizen who was acting legally, full stop.

Once a crime has been committed by law enforcement, nothing happening as a result of that crime is considered valid evidence for law enforcement.

The difference is the crime committed by law enforcement.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I don't know all the details but he did have some false stuff--his mother trying to hide her illegal status.

Again, documents that you are not allowed to examine cannot be 'false' in any reasonable sense.

The existence of documents that might or might not be false if presented in other contexts is completely irrelevant where the Bill of Rights prohibits the government from examining those documents without probable cause that they didn't have.

Seriously, this is foundational US freedom stuff. If you won't defend the Bill of Rights against abuse by the government or its agencies, then you no longer have the nation to which your constitution used to apply. You have something new and a great deal more unpleasant and dangerous.

Your entire government and military is sworn to prevent this kind of abuse from occurring.

It's as indefensible as any imaginable act by a US government agency. And here you are, seeking to defend it. Why do you hate America?

A prohibition on demanding documents does not prohibit examining offered documents.

 

[bilby]

I don't know all the details but he did have some false stuff--his mother trying to hide her illegal status.

Again, documents that you are not allowed to examine cannot be 'false' in any reasonable sense.

The existence of documents that might or might not be false if presented in other contexts is completely irrelevant where the Bill of Rights prohibits the government from examining those documents without probable cause that they didn't have.

Seriously, this is foundational US freedom stuff. If you won't defend the Bill of Rights against abuse by the government or its agencies, then you no longer have the nation to which your constitution used to apply. You have something new and a great deal more unpleasant and dangerous.

Your entire government and military is sworn to prevent this kind of abuse from occurring.

It's as indefensible as any imaginable act by a US government agency. And here you are, seeking to defend it. Why do you hate America?

A prohibition on demanding documents does not prohibit examining offered documents.

But causes don't follow effects. Your point was that these documents amount to exoneration for ICE for wrongfully detaining a US citizen. As they were offered AFTER he was detained, they cannot possibly have been part of the reason he was detained, and so they cannot affect his right to compensation for having been unlawfully detained.

 

[angelo]

"These people" are US citizens traveling to a soccer match in the US, from their home in the US. They are not trying to enter any other sovereign country, and I suggest that the authorities obey the constitution they are sworn to uphold.

Why the fuck you think that any other response is even vaguely acceptable I do not know. But I have very strong suspicions.

Aren't we discussing illegal immigrants? WTF said anything about US citizens getting arrested for wanting to go home?

So you have very strong opinions, but haven't actually read the OP, the thread, or the story on which it is based?

Why doesn't this surprise me?

The US citizens were detained while traveling wholly within the US.

Nobody was "wanting to go home". They left their home (in the US) to go to a soccer camp (also in the US). And were detained by ICE because they couldn't show papers that (in the opinion of the ICE officials involved) proved their US citizenship. Which, according to the fourth amendment of the constitution of the United States, they don't have to be able to show to anyone who doesn't have probable cause.

So the whole ICE is to be blamed and castigated for the mistake of one or two individuals? Let he/she who is without sin cast the first stone!

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Let he/she who is without sin cast the first stone!

So ICE should never arrest anyone.

 

[angelo]

Let he/she who is without sin cast the first stone!

So ICE should never arrest anyone.

People doing their jobs to the best of their abilities should not be crucified because of minor mistake from either side.

 

[Jarhyn]

Let he/she who is without sin cast the first stone!

So ICE should never arrest anyone.

People doing their jobs to the best of their abilities should not be crucified because of minor mistake from either side.

People "doing their job to the best of their ability" when the job is something fundamentally unethical need to be stopped with all necessary force.

 

[Patooka]

Let he/she who is without sin cast the first stone!

So ICE should never arrest anyone.

People doing their jobs to the best of their abilities should not be crucified because of minor mistake from either side.

When half the organisation is part of a social media group that jokes about raping and murdering elected officials, we are way, way, way beyond "doing their jobs to the best of their abilities" and "minor mistakes" rationalizations. You would know this if you were paying attention.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So you have very strong opinions, but haven't actually read the OP, the thread, or the story on which it is based?

Why doesn't this surprise me?

The US citizens were detained while traveling wholly within the US.

Nobody was "wanting to go home". They left their home (in the US) to go to a soccer camp (also in the US). And were detained by ICE because they couldn't show papers that (in the opinion of the ICE officials involved) proved their US citizenship. Which, according to the fourth amendment of the constitution of the United States, they don't have to be able to show to anyone who doesn't have probable cause.

So the whole ICE is to be blamed and castigated for the mistake of one or two individuals? Let he/she who is without sin cast the first stone!

They violated his American civil rights (detained for three weeks without charge, extremely limited access to a lawyer), which requires more than just a couple "bad apples" to accomplish.

 

[KeepTalking]

So you have very strong opinions, but haven't actually read the OP, the thread, or the story on which it is based?

Why doesn't this surprise me?

The US citizens were detained while traveling wholly within the US.

Nobody was "wanting to go home". They left their home (in the US) to go to a soccer camp (also in the US). And were detained by ICE because they couldn't show papers that (in the opinion of the ICE officials involved) proved their US citizenship. Which, according to the fourth amendment of the constitution of the United States, they don't have to be able to show to anyone who doesn't have probable cause.

So the whole ICE is to be blamed and castigated for the mistake of one or two individuals? Let he/she who is without sin cast the first stone!

This is rich coming from someone who blames and castigates an entire religion for the actions of a small subset of that religion.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Let he/she who is without sin cast the first stone!

So ICE should never arrest anyone.

People doing their jobs to the best of their abilities should not be crucified because of minor mistake from either side.

But you said no one should cast any stones. That means ICE should not cast stones, i.e. not arrest people for wrongdoing. If you are going to use a platitude to make a point you probably shouldn't leave your argument open to the platitude being used against it as well. So, why is it okay for you to be critical of someone (allegedly) breaking the law by crossing a border (allegedly illegally) but it's not okay for anyone to be critical of government agents acting illegally by violating the Constitution? Why do your platitudes only apply to one group of people?

 

[bilby]

People doing their jobs to the best of their abilities should not be crucified because of minor mistake from either side.

People "doing their job to the best of their ability" when the job is something fundamentally unethical need to be stopped with all necessary force.

Oddly, most people manage to do their jobs without trampling over the legal, constitutional, and human rights of others.

If you can't work in Immigration enforcement without accidentally detaining innocent citizens; Or you can't work in government without occasionally totally ignoring the constitution under which that government operates, then you are incompetent and in the wrong career.

As a government official, saying "I did my job to the best of my ability, but accidentally went against the constitution, which is a reasonable mistake that could happen to anyone", carries about as much weight as a bank teller saying "I did my job to the best of my ability, but accidentally put the money in my purse instead of the safe, which was a reasonable mistake that could happen to anyone".

 

[Loren Pechtel]

A prohibition on demanding documents does not prohibit examining offered documents.

But causes don't follow effects. Your point was that these documents amount to exoneration for ICE for wrongfully detaining a US citizen. As they were offered AFTER he was detained, they cannot possibly have been part of the reason he was detained, and so they cannot affect his right to compensation for having been unlawfully detained.

More info on this: Turns out the documents were not presented, but rather were already in the system. Specifically, an incorrect visa application made by the mother years ago.

It still doesn't change my position that he doesn't deserve compensation for being detained as his mother did play a role in causing the situation. However, I do think he deserves a fair amount of compensation for the conditions under which he was detained.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So the whole ICE is to be blamed and castigated for the mistake of one or two individuals? Let he/she who is without sin cast the first stone!

1) Employers are responsible for improper acts of their employees.

2) This is far from the only wrongdoing on their part. When you see enough bits of rot figure the whole thing is rotten.