9 ms·

<<Insert Rage>> But for interesting HN discussion... anyone got any juice on why this is happening. Is there orders going down the chain of command from the pr

<<Insert Rage>> But for interesting HN discussion... anyone got any juice on why this is happening. Is there orders going down the chain of command from the president to do this sort of thing. Was this behaviour always there but less reported before? Are they more emboldened by the current environment?

Larrikin 1y ago
>anyone got any juice on why this is happening. Their skin color and national origin is offensive to the president and the percentage of the country that voted for him.
ohgr 1y ago
As my wise but now throughly dead German grandmother said: ”Do you think the nazis appeared out of thin air? No they were everywhere just waiting for someone to enable them with a label and an ideology.” I suspect something analogous is happening here and it’s similarly not pretty. Hopefully it’ll get nipped in the bud quickly. My fellow citizens scare me more than the government does.
- surgical_fire 1y ago
  The interesting thing about this parallel, is that the "final solution" in Germany was final because it was not the original solution. Originally they wanted to, well, deport the undesirables to some far off country, initially to Madagascar if memory serves. Managing mass incarceration and deportation is a difficult task however, and these people (both then and now) are not exactly competent at anything beyond bravado. Watching this unfolding from afar is interesting, because I can do so with some healthy detachment. If I lived across the pond I would be pretty desperate right now.
  - watwut 1y ago
    The end goal was world domination, as in owning whole world. So, they would eventually come to Madagascar too. Majority of Jews killed in Hocaust were not Germans. They were from conquered countries. So, while there was some Madagascar plans floating and while they tried to deport as many German Jews (majority of who were atheists, considered themselves Germans etc) in first stages, they were aware there is going to be showdown later on anyway.
  - xedrac 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - codewench 1y ago
      Seeing as how this article is talking about the deportation of US citizens, I'm going to question what exactly you mean by "here illegally". Expanding the argument: I've just decided that you are illegally, and will thus be deported. As there is no due process, my word is law, have fun wherever you end up I literally do not care. Does that seem fair? And before arguing "well this wouldn't happen, I'm not here illegally", again, this is an article about the deportation of US citizens. Children no less.
      - deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
      - rdtsc 1y ago
        > US citizens. Children no less. But their parents aren’t. Parents can be deported. So let’s imagine they did that. We’d have an article how cruel they stole / kidnapped a child from their parents. Would that be better? Having a child doesn’t automatically provide a legal cover for staying and not getting deported. Maybe that’s a risk the parents didn’t know about?
        heromal 1y ago
        What's the point in arguing about what-ifs? The children were deported. In real life. There's no need for hypothetical scenarios, focus on the actual point of the article and thread.
        miltonlost 1y ago
        > What's the point in arguing about what-ifs? The children were deported. Anyone arguing in what-ifs agrees with the deportation but can't be that blatantly racist on here. Ignoring this specific case allows them to muddy the waters. Anyone playing Devil's Advocate consistently are usually part of the devil's party.
  - afpx 1y ago
    Unfortunately, if this follows history, the safest thing to do is to not do anything, blend in, and wait for external help. Afaik, only a handful of Germans who resisted survived. But, I don’t see any help for us coming anytime soon.
    - ohgr 1y ago
      I suspect it won’t come. The US embedded itself in everyone else’s business and is now withdrawing so we all have our own problems to deal with.
    - giraffe_lady 1y ago
      Then honor demands that we die. I think there are still other outcomes possible but if that's how it is that's how it is.
      - afpx 1y ago
        Yeah, there are some possibilities. For example, if a strong resistance leader emerged. But, are there any good candidates for that role? I can't think of any.
        giraffe_lady 1y ago
        Things like this are stopped by movements, not individual heroes. There are almost certainly organizations in your area already working against this. No one is coming to save us. But if anyone does it is the people who were already trying to, bolstered by people like you who see it now. Get in there.
        afpx 1y ago
        (Edited based on comment below) I recognize the optimism, but realistically, without a strong and strategic leader, coordination will collapse into disorganization and infighting. Historical examples like Occupy Wall Street demonstrate that leaderless movements tend to self-sabotage and generate instability without achieving meaningful outcomes.
  - southernplaces7 1y ago
    >Managing mass incarceration and deportation is a difficult task however, and these people (both then and now) are not exactly competent at anything beyond bravado. The holocaust also required mass incarceration and deportation, except that the huge undertaking of deportation was towards death camps in occupied territories instead of some foreign land. On the first point above, I caution against thinking that it would be much easier; it wasn't really, they just decided that they wanted to kill the people they considered undesirable after all. On the second point, it's worth noting that the efforts at expulsion partly failed because many other countries, despite knowing of the brutal repression being suffered by the jews (and others but the jews in particular) decided to stonewall most avenues of exit from Nazi domains. Deportation would have still been terrible, but at least it would have put millions of eventual victims outside the reach of gas chambers and death squads. Such as it was, a sort of tacit complicity of indifference didn't allow that to happen, by others who weren't even necessarily supporters of the Nazis. In either case, be careful about calling evil people practicing evil ends incompetent. In so many ways they were very competent at far more than simple bravado, and underestimating the capabilities of barbaric monsters is always dangerous for future lessons.
    - surgical_fire 1y ago
      > be careful about calling evil people practicing evil ends incompetent. The Nazi were a mess, plagued with infighting, and completely incapable of measuring the strength of their opponents, which eventually led to their downfall. Incompetent evil people can still do a lot of harm until they screw up for good. This doesn't stop them being incompetent.
      - southernplaces7 1y ago
        >The Nazi were a mess, plagued with infighting, and completely incapable of measuring the strength of their opponents, which eventually led to their downfall. no the Nazis weren't entirely a mess or completely incompetent. There was lots of infighting, partly deliberately designed to be that way by Hitler's tactics for organizing his own subordinate leadership levels, but there was also a massive amount of military, industrial and logistical competence and a robust amount of cohesion and careful, powerful cooperation on fundamental aims. Had there not been, the Nazi's never would have risen to power so effectively, formed their dictatorship so effectively or managed a colossal war against multiple enemies for so many years so effectively, and only been defeated at such a gargantuan cost in lives and resources. The Nazis underestimated the military strength of their enemies, but not nearly so badly as to not wage very effective war and pose a very, very serious threat to these enemies for several years. I really suggest a book called "The Wages of Destruction: the making and breaking of the Nazi Economy" by Adam Tooze, as a nice basic primer on how wrong these ideas of supposedly incompetent Nazis are. The above is all deviating a bit from the topic at hand but with this sidestep into a look at the Nazis, you're working from a simplistic caricature view of a more complex situation with complex evil people, and I fear that this is also all too common when many critics today view the Trump government. It's not staffed entirely by caricaturesque evil idiots. Many of its supporters are intelligent and cohesive in their guiding methodologies. (Also, no, the above isn't to compare the bad actions of Trump's government to the completely unrestrained monstrosities of the Nazis. I'm comparing defects of external analysis)
- sitkack 1y ago
  I too have noticed the same language coming out of folks here, folks that have had accounts for over 10 or 15 years. They were always here, but now they emboldened and they are doing their best to make sure that overton window stays very very open on the right.
  - ohgr 1y ago
    I had a friend until recently. Really nice guy. Always looking out for people. Never said a bad word. In the last couple of years he turned into a nasty piece of work jumping on every politicised story out there and treating it as gospel. He alienated everyone around him. It turns out that some people don't have a mind of their own and are waiting for orders. Here is no exception. Look at the foaming at the mouth praise of the second coming of Microsoft when Satya took over. And where we are now? Look at the hype as well - blockchain, crypto and AI now. Mindless people slithering all over everything. In fact I find a lot of the people in the technology sector to either be entirely morally bankrupt or lack any kind of self or societal awareness of their speech of actions. It disgusts me. I've been on HN pretty much since day one but the accounts last perhaps 6 months before I tire of it. I moved out of the tech-first industry about 10 years ago and into a position of tech as a tool not a reason for a business existing and there are better people here.
    - kentm 1y ago
      I’ve been in tech for about 2 decades now, and the general culture has always been to disregard ethics and social impact. How many times have we heard “We’re just building tools. Tools are apolitical and ethically neutral, it’s how you use them that matters!” It turns out that is actually not the case. Plus the insistence that we can cordon off an area of life and designate it non political is incredibly common but also pretty naive (and dare I say privileged). That is to say, we in the tech industry often encourage this sort of moral bankruptcy and like to pretend we’re above it all.
      - ohgr 1y ago
        I think a lot of that attitude is self-justification to proceed as they intend without moral compass. Personally I can't do that. Everything we do has a consequence. I've got a copy of Careless People sitting in front of me I'm scared to read at the moment.
- stackskipton 1y ago
  Since we are quoting, I quote FDR: "Democracy has disappeared in several other great nations--not because the people of those nations disliked democracy, but because they had grown tired of unemployment and insecurity, of seeing their children hungry while they sat helpless in the face of government confusion and government weakness through lack of leadership in government." True, we are not in bad shape like 1930s Germany or United States but as neoliberalism rot has really set in, people feel economically shaky, and government clearly is not responsive to them. Combined with Social Media warping people brain on what is "success" and "strong man" who will take care of things is clearly appealing. Many of them can also be turned around but it's going to take some doing.
elmerfud 1y ago
Your last statement is correct. They are just emboldened by the current political environment. Any law enforcement has a problem where all they see is criminals all day everyday, now we know they aren't always criminals, but that's their view point. There should be sufficient checks and balances to ensure that due process is still upheld. What we're seeing now is the lack of checks because law enforcement feels they will never be held accountable for violating due process. This, while likely not a direct order of the president, it is an environment that his rhetoric has fostered. Even in the cases where the supreme court has said, unanimously, that people have been deported improperly this environment causes those in positions to correct it to ignore the courts. I support the general idea of expedited deportation of those here illegally, those without valid documents to be here, I don't automatically have a problem if there is greater restrictions on entering or issuing new visas, but I have a major problem with violating due process and these kind of mistakes that's are a result of lack of due diligence. The courts need to get more heavily involved here. It's easy to blame the president but short of some directive telling people to violate the law the blame is misdirected (until it's election time). The blame needs to be on those individuals doing this thing or seeing it and ignoring it. This is where the courts need to totally strip away default qualified immunity, especially for immigration officers. Because qualified immunity allows them to just say they were following orders without them having to evaluate if what they are doing is legal or not. I believe if qualified immunity was gone a lot of this nonsense would stop. They would make sure that anyone who was deported was meant to be deported. I have a friend who is here legally awaiting an asylum hearing, been waiting for 5 years. They were stopped by police for a valid reason and, from what was described the police had probable cause, but the charge itself is very minor. Because she's documented waiting asylum they contacted immigration, for no reason. There was no probable cause to think she was in violation of her immigration status, but they still contacted them and they requested she be held. So now she detained and there's probable cause to do so but it's immigration so they can. This is where no qualified immunity would make these officers think twice. They know they have no probable cause to continue to hold her beyond the initial charge. Without qualified immunity they would understand that continuing to hold someone after a judge has allowed their release means that they would lose their house their life their future. So I really think we need to end to qualified immunity across the board. Have the people who are supposed to protect us and be responsible for their actions.
eviks 1y ago
All of the above?
potato3732842 1y ago
Because it's always been happening. If they didn't already have this sort of abuse practiced they wouldn't be so good at it. The ACLU used to write basically the same exact pieces about the DEA Maybe it's 10% or 20% more prevalent or worse, I can't say from my vantage point, but it's a difference of degree, not a categorical one. You read these stories and they read exactly like all the other stories of how all sorts of "criminals" have been abused by the system for years, especially when they have a political blank check to do do. Making it hard for people to get a lawyer, moving too fast for people to appeal anything or get outside scrutiny is exactly how these systems have always behaved when they feel like it. Now it's ICE and not DEA or whatever but this is basically the level of abuse with which the authorities have always treated with. It's nice that the public is paying attention now, but I have very little hope that it will actually lead to systemic changes.
- hartator 1y ago
  Yes, nothing much changed law-wise. No due process at the borders is a shame both now and before, but hopefully this time there is a willingness to change things. Probably not at the next swing of power.
  - ty6853 1y ago
    My guy will do better with the power they never destroy.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - whimsicalism 1y ago
    It is genuinely an extremely difficult challenge to manage illegal crossings if every individual must be processed through the full U.S. legal system which has massive resourcing and backlog problems (3m+ cases). Voters across the political spectrum have made it unmistakably clear — in poll after poll — that they are deeply dissatisfied with the current rate of illegal and asylum-seeking entries. Is there a morally permissible way to enact their will?
HDThoreaun 1y ago
The suffering is the point. The current administration thinks that by publicly treating anyone vaguely foreign horribly they will be able to end the allure illegal immigration. I guess the dirty secret is that this sort of stuff has been happening, the difference is that now the government wants everyone to know about it
somenameforme 1y ago
Every day across the world thousands of people are removed from countries around the world for violating immigration laws. Except in cases of where it coincided with criminality, it's always going to be very ugly, because it means somebody had built up a life for themselves somewhere and that is now ended due to them having been born in a different place and then overstayed their permission, or never received such, to stay somewhere else. Like in this case, what do you propose as an alternative with a precedent that you think could be agreeable to most people? The parents were in the country illegally, and the children's citizenship was solely one of birthright. Any sort of "pleasant" outcome would effectively require turning birthright citizenship into defacto citizenship for the parents as well, at least if they can stay illegally for long enough. That's not only completely unrealistic, but also a complete slap in the face to the millions of people who try to migrate legally and are refused entry.
- yodsanklai 1y ago
  > it's always going to be very ugly, It doesn't have to be as ugly as what is described in the article.
- apical_dendrite 1y ago
  > Any sort of "pleasant" outcome would effectively require turning birthright citizenship into defacto citizenship for the parents as well, at least if they can stay illegally for long enough. No, there are lots of immigration statuses between "illegal" and "citizen". DAPA, which was the Obama administration's policy, gave parents of US citizens a status where they could get temporary renewable work permits and exemption for deportation. This was not citizenship, or even a status that could allow someone to eventually become a citizen.
  - pclmulqdq 1y ago
    Most of those statuses are called "visas" and they have been around for a while. Obama's innovation was giving a weird form of status ("we know you broke the law and we aren't enforcing it") to people who broke the law when crossing the border. Most people with a non-illegal and non-citizen status are supposed to apply for that status before crossing the border.
miltonlost 1y ago
> anyone got any juice on why this is happening. Because Trump is an abject racist with a white nationalist policy who ran on deporting what he finds to be undesirable. It's not hard.
pge 1y ago
The current administration has set targets for numbers of people deported(which ICE is currently behind on). That creates an incentive to skip due process in order to get more people deported more quickly (and the awareness that there will no consequences for doing so probably contributes as well)
- scarface_74 1y ago
  And while trying to meet those numbers, they are being specifically told not to do mass raids of farms and other business in red states that will hurt Trump voters
  - mgkimsal 1y ago
    I suspect it's Trump donors they may be looking to spare, at least a bit. I don't get the impression they care about previous Trump voters very much, except to buy merch at this point.
  - morkalork 1y ago
    Also, businesses caught employing illegal immigrants seemingly don't face any punishment either. Migrants wouldn't enter the US illegally if they couldn't find employment, and they wouldn't find employment if businesses were harshly punished. As it is, everyone is incentivized to keep this cat and mouse game going.
    - _DeadFred_ 1y ago
      THe FBI/ICE sure cam after a judge that helped an illegal immigrant. I'm sure the FBI/ICE is using the same zeal to go after employers who helped them.
      - tomrod 1y ago
        I'm a bit hazy on the story, but wasn't ICE interfering with her court?
doctorpangloss 1y ago
Previously with the family separation policy it was part of an aggressive campaign led by Stephen Miller personally. There are now a few more people who want to do this as much as he does, all in the administration. It was Trump who hired those people, and then it was Trump who rescinded family separations and fired Neilsen over it, because it made bad media. The public has a template for exactly how to stop it. All that said, this is what the Republican base wants.
UmGuys 1y ago
Are you serious? Trump campaigned on spreading cruelty to these people and he's doing it. There's financial incentive to keep people in private prisons, and we're paying to send them to concentration camps, so it's not money. It's just bigotry.
yibg 1y ago
Deportations have always happened of course. But details matter. What’s making this administration different are: - sloppiness and seeming cruelty of the process, intentional or not - disregard for judicial rulings - pushing boundaries with regards to who (those with legal status) and how (sending people to foreign prisons)

Larrikin 1y ago

>anyone got any juice on why this is happening. Their skin color and national origin is offensive to the president and the percentage of the country that voted for him.

ohgr 1y ago

As my wise but now throughly dead German grandmother said: ”Do you think the nazis appeared out of thin air? No they were everywhere just waiting for someone to enable them with a label and an ideology.” I suspect something analogous is happening here and it’s similarly not pretty. Hopefully it’ll get nipped in the bud quickly. My fellow citizens scare me more than the government does.

surgical_fire 1y ago
The interesting thing about this parallel, is that the "final solution" in Germany was final because it was not the original solution. Originally they wanted to, well, deport the undesirables to some far off country, initially to Madagascar if memory serves. Managing mass incarceration and deportation is a difficult task however, and these people (both then and now) are not exactly competent at anything beyond bravado. Watching this unfolding from afar is interesting, because I can do so with some healthy detachment. If I lived across the pond I would be pretty desperate right now.
- watwut 1y ago
  The end goal was world domination, as in owning whole world. So, they would eventually come to Madagascar too. Majority of Jews killed in Hocaust were not Germans. They were from conquered countries. So, while there was some Madagascar plans floating and while they tried to deport as many German Jews (majority of who were atheists, considered themselves Germans etc) in first stages, they were aware there is going to be showdown later on anyway.
- xedrac 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - codewench 1y ago
    Seeing as how this article is talking about the deportation of US citizens, I'm going to question what exactly you mean by "here illegally". Expanding the argument: I've just decided that you are illegally, and will thus be deported. As there is no due process, my word is law, have fun wherever you end up I literally do not care. Does that seem fair? And before arguing "well this wouldn't happen, I'm not here illegally", again, this is an article about the deportation of US citizens. Children no less.
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    - rdtsc 1y ago
      > US citizens. Children no less. But their parents aren’t. Parents can be deported. So let’s imagine they did that. We’d have an article how cruel they stole / kidnapped a child from their parents. Would that be better? Having a child doesn’t automatically provide a legal cover for staying and not getting deported. Maybe that’s a risk the parents didn’t know about?
      - heromal 1y ago
        What's the point in arguing about what-ifs? The children were deported. In real life. There's no need for hypothetical scenarios, focus on the actual point of the article and thread.
        miltonlost 1y ago
        > What's the point in arguing about what-ifs? The children were deported. Anyone arguing in what-ifs agrees with the deportation but can't be that blatantly racist on here. Ignoring this specific case allows them to muddy the waters. Anyone playing Devil's Advocate consistently are usually part of the devil's party.
- afpx 1y ago
  Unfortunately, if this follows history, the safest thing to do is to not do anything, blend in, and wait for external help. Afaik, only a handful of Germans who resisted survived. But, I don’t see any help for us coming anytime soon.
  - ohgr 1y ago
    I suspect it won’t come. The US embedded itself in everyone else’s business and is now withdrawing so we all have our own problems to deal with.
  - giraffe_lady 1y ago
    Then honor demands that we die. I think there are still other outcomes possible but if that's how it is that's how it is.
    - afpx 1y ago
      Yeah, there are some possibilities. For example, if a strong resistance leader emerged. But, are there any good candidates for that role? I can't think of any.
      - giraffe_lady 1y ago
        Things like this are stopped by movements, not individual heroes. There are almost certainly organizations in your area already working against this. No one is coming to save us. But if anyone does it is the people who were already trying to, bolstered by people like you who see it now. Get in there.
        afpx 1y ago
        (Edited based on comment below) I recognize the optimism, but realistically, without a strong and strategic leader, coordination will collapse into disorganization and infighting. Historical examples like Occupy Wall Street demonstrate that leaderless movements tend to self-sabotage and generate instability without achieving meaningful outcomes.
- southernplaces7 1y ago
  >Managing mass incarceration and deportation is a difficult task however, and these people (both then and now) are not exactly competent at anything beyond bravado. The holocaust also required mass incarceration and deportation, except that the huge undertaking of deportation was towards death camps in occupied territories instead of some foreign land. On the first point above, I caution against thinking that it would be much easier; it wasn't really, they just decided that they wanted to kill the people they considered undesirable after all. On the second point, it's worth noting that the efforts at expulsion partly failed because many other countries, despite knowing of the brutal repression being suffered by the jews (and others but the jews in particular) decided to stonewall most avenues of exit from Nazi domains. Deportation would have still been terrible, but at least it would have put millions of eventual victims outside the reach of gas chambers and death squads. Such as it was, a sort of tacit complicity of indifference didn't allow that to happen, by others who weren't even necessarily supporters of the Nazis. In either case, be careful about calling evil people practicing evil ends incompetent. In so many ways they were very competent at far more than simple bravado, and underestimating the capabilities of barbaric monsters is always dangerous for future lessons.
  - surgical_fire 1y ago
    > be careful about calling evil people practicing evil ends incompetent. The Nazi were a mess, plagued with infighting, and completely incapable of measuring the strength of their opponents, which eventually led to their downfall. Incompetent evil people can still do a lot of harm until they screw up for good. This doesn't stop them being incompetent.
    - southernplaces7 1y ago
      >The Nazi were a mess, plagued with infighting, and completely incapable of measuring the strength of their opponents, which eventually led to their downfall. no the Nazis weren't entirely a mess or completely incompetent. There was lots of infighting, partly deliberately designed to be that way by Hitler's tactics for organizing his own subordinate leadership levels, but there was also a massive amount of military, industrial and logistical competence and a robust amount of cohesion and careful, powerful cooperation on fundamental aims. Had there not been, the Nazi's never would have risen to power so effectively, formed their dictatorship so effectively or managed a colossal war against multiple enemies for so many years so effectively, and only been defeated at such a gargantuan cost in lives and resources. The Nazis underestimated the military strength of their enemies, but not nearly so badly as to not wage very effective war and pose a very, very serious threat to these enemies for several years. I really suggest a book called "The Wages of Destruction: the making and breaking of the Nazi Economy" by Adam Tooze, as a nice basic primer on how wrong these ideas of supposedly incompetent Nazis are. The above is all deviating a bit from the topic at hand but with this sidestep into a look at the Nazis, you're working from a simplistic caricature view of a more complex situation with complex evil people, and I fear that this is also all too common when many critics today view the Trump government. It's not staffed entirely by caricaturesque evil idiots. Many of its supporters are intelligent and cohesive in their guiding methodologies. (Also, no, the above isn't to compare the bad actions of Trump's government to the completely unrestrained monstrosities of the Nazis. I'm comparing defects of external analysis)
sitkack 1y ago
I too have noticed the same language coming out of folks here, folks that have had accounts for over 10 or 15 years. They were always here, but now they emboldened and they are doing their best to make sure that overton window stays very very open on the right.
- ohgr 1y ago
  I had a friend until recently. Really nice guy. Always looking out for people. Never said a bad word. In the last couple of years he turned into a nasty piece of work jumping on every politicised story out there and treating it as gospel. He alienated everyone around him. It turns out that some people don't have a mind of their own and are waiting for orders. Here is no exception. Look at the foaming at the mouth praise of the second coming of Microsoft when Satya took over. And where we are now? Look at the hype as well - blockchain, crypto and AI now. Mindless people slithering all over everything. In fact I find a lot of the people in the technology sector to either be entirely morally bankrupt or lack any kind of self or societal awareness of their speech of actions. It disgusts me. I've been on HN pretty much since day one but the accounts last perhaps 6 months before I tire of it. I moved out of the tech-first industry about 10 years ago and into a position of tech as a tool not a reason for a business existing and there are better people here.
  - kentm 1y ago
    I’ve been in tech for about 2 decades now, and the general culture has always been to disregard ethics and social impact. How many times have we heard “We’re just building tools. Tools are apolitical and ethically neutral, it’s how you use them that matters!” It turns out that is actually not the case. Plus the insistence that we can cordon off an area of life and designate it non political is incredibly common but also pretty naive (and dare I say privileged). That is to say, we in the tech industry often encourage this sort of moral bankruptcy and like to pretend we’re above it all.
    - ohgr 1y ago
      I think a lot of that attitude is self-justification to proceed as they intend without moral compass. Personally I can't do that. Everything we do has a consequence. I've got a copy of Careless People sitting in front of me I'm scared to read at the moment.
stackskipton 1y ago
Since we are quoting, I quote FDR: "Democracy has disappeared in several other great nations--not because the people of those nations disliked democracy, but because they had grown tired of unemployment and insecurity, of seeing their children hungry while they sat helpless in the face of government confusion and government weakness through lack of leadership in government." True, we are not in bad shape like 1930s Germany or United States but as neoliberalism rot has really set in, people feel economically shaky, and government clearly is not responsive to them. Combined with Social Media warping people brain on what is "success" and "strong man" who will take care of things is clearly appealing. Many of them can also be turned around but it's going to take some doing.

elmerfud 1y ago

Your last statement is correct. They are just emboldened by the current political environment. Any law enforcement has a problem where all they see is criminals all day everyday, now we know they aren't always criminals, but that's their view point. There should be sufficient checks and balances to ensure that due process is still upheld. What we're seeing now is the lack of checks because law enforcement feels they will never be held accountable for violating due process. This, while likely not a direct order of the president, it is an environment that his rhetoric has fostered. Even in the cases where the supreme court has said, unanimously, that people have been deported improperly this environment causes those in positions to correct it to ignore the courts. I support the general idea of expedited deportation of those here illegally, those without valid documents to be here, I don't automatically have a problem if there is greater restrictions on entering or issuing new visas, but I have a major problem with violating due process and these kind of mistakes that's are a result of lack of due diligence. The courts need to get more heavily involved here. It's easy to blame the president but short of some directive telling people to violate the law the blame is misdirected (until it's election time). The blame needs to be on those individuals doing this thing or seeing it and ignoring it. This is where the courts need to totally strip away default qualified immunity, especially for immigration officers. Because qualified immunity allows them to just say they were following orders without them having to evaluate if what they are doing is legal or not. I believe if qualified immunity was gone a lot of this nonsense would stop. They would make sure that anyone who was deported was meant to be deported. I have a friend who is here legally awaiting an asylum hearing, been waiting for 5 years. They were stopped by police for a valid reason and, from what was described the police had probable cause, but the charge itself is very minor. Because she's documented waiting asylum they contacted immigration, for no reason. There was no probable cause to think she was in violation of her immigration status, but they still contacted them and they requested she be held. So now she detained and there's probable cause to do so but it's immigration so they can. This is where no qualified immunity would make these officers think twice. They know they have no probable cause to continue to hold her beyond the initial charge. Without qualified immunity they would understand that continuing to hold someone after a judge has allowed their release means that they would lose their house their life their future. So I really think we need to end to qualified immunity across the board. Have the people who are supposed to protect us and be responsible for their actions.

eviks 1y ago

All of the above?

potato3732842 1y ago

Because it's always been happening. If they didn't already have this sort of abuse practiced they wouldn't be so good at it. The ACLU used to write basically the same exact pieces about the DEA Maybe it's 10% or 20% more prevalent or worse, I can't say from my vantage point, but it's a difference of degree, not a categorical one. You read these stories and they read exactly like all the other stories of how all sorts of "criminals" have been abused by the system for years, especially when they have a political blank check to do do. Making it hard for people to get a lawyer, moving too fast for people to appeal anything or get outside scrutiny is exactly how these systems have always behaved when they feel like it. Now it's ICE and not DEA or whatever but this is basically the level of abuse with which the authorities have always treated with. It's nice that the public is paying attention now, but I have very little hope that it will actually lead to systemic changes.

hartator 1y ago
Yes, nothing much changed law-wise. No due process at the borders is a shame both now and before, but hopefully this time there is a willingness to change things. Probably not at the next swing of power.
- ty6853 1y ago
  My guy will do better with the power they never destroy.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- whimsicalism 1y ago
  It is genuinely an extremely difficult challenge to manage illegal crossings if every individual must be processed through the full U.S. legal system which has massive resourcing and backlog problems (3m+ cases). Voters across the political spectrum have made it unmistakably clear — in poll after poll — that they are deeply dissatisfied with the current rate of illegal and asylum-seeking entries. Is there a morally permissible way to enact their will?

HDThoreaun 1y ago

The suffering is the point. The current administration thinks that by publicly treating anyone vaguely foreign horribly they will be able to end the allure illegal immigration. I guess the dirty secret is that this sort of stuff has been happening, the difference is that now the government wants everyone to know about it

somenameforme 1y ago

Every day across the world thousands of people are removed from countries around the world for violating immigration laws. Except in cases of where it coincided with criminality, it's always going to be very ugly, because it means somebody had built up a life for themselves somewhere and that is now ended due to them having been born in a different place and then overstayed their permission, or never received such, to stay somewhere else. Like in this case, what do you propose as an alternative with a precedent that you think could be agreeable to most people? The parents were in the country illegally, and the children's citizenship was solely one of birthright. Any sort of "pleasant" outcome would effectively require turning birthright citizenship into defacto citizenship for the parents as well, at least if they can stay illegally for long enough. That's not only completely unrealistic, but also a complete slap in the face to the millions of people who try to migrate legally and are refused entry.

yodsanklai 1y ago
> it's always going to be very ugly, It doesn't have to be as ugly as what is described in the article.
apical_dendrite 1y ago
> Any sort of "pleasant" outcome would effectively require turning birthright citizenship into defacto citizenship for the parents as well, at least if they can stay illegally for long enough. No, there are lots of immigration statuses between "illegal" and "citizen". DAPA, which was the Obama administration's policy, gave parents of US citizens a status where they could get temporary renewable work permits and exemption for deportation. This was not citizenship, or even a status that could allow someone to eventually become a citizen.
- pclmulqdq 1y ago
  Most of those statuses are called "visas" and they have been around for a while. Obama's innovation was giving a weird form of status ("we know you broke the law and we aren't enforcing it") to people who broke the law when crossing the border. Most people with a non-illegal and non-citizen status are supposed to apply for that status before crossing the border.

miltonlost 1y ago

> anyone got any juice on why this is happening. Because Trump is an abject racist with a white nationalist policy who ran on deporting what he finds to be undesirable. It's not hard.

pge 1y ago

The current administration has set targets for numbers of people deported(which ICE is currently behind on). That creates an incentive to skip due process in order to get more people deported more quickly (and the awareness that there will no consequences for doing so probably contributes as well)

scarface_74 1y ago
And while trying to meet those numbers, they are being specifically told not to do mass raids of farms and other business in red states that will hurt Trump voters
- mgkimsal 1y ago
  I suspect it's Trump donors they may be looking to spare, at least a bit. I don't get the impression they care about previous Trump voters very much, except to buy merch at this point.
- morkalork 1y ago
  Also, businesses caught employing illegal immigrants seemingly don't face any punishment either. Migrants wouldn't enter the US illegally if they couldn't find employment, and they wouldn't find employment if businesses were harshly punished. As it is, everyone is incentivized to keep this cat and mouse game going.
  - _DeadFred_ 1y ago
    THe FBI/ICE sure cam after a judge that helped an illegal immigrant. I'm sure the FBI/ICE is using the same zeal to go after employers who helped them.
    - tomrod 1y ago
      I'm a bit hazy on the story, but wasn't ICE interfering with her court?

doctorpangloss 1y ago

Previously with the family separation policy it was part of an aggressive campaign led by Stephen Miller personally. There are now a few more people who want to do this as much as he does, all in the administration. It was Trump who hired those people, and then it was Trump who rescinded family separations and fired Neilsen over it, because it made bad media. The public has a template for exactly how to stop it. All that said, this is what the Republican base wants.

UmGuys 1y ago

Are you serious? Trump campaigned on spreading cruelty to these people and he's doing it. There's financial incentive to keep people in private prisons, and we're paying to send them to concentration camps, so it's not money. It's just bigotry.

yibg 1y ago

Deportations have always happened of course. But details matter. What’s making this administration different are: - sloppiness and seeming cruelty of the process, intentional or not - disregard for judicial rulings - pushing boundaries with regards to who (those with legal status) and how (sending people to foreign prisons)