You don't hear about it so much (unless you go looking) because Texas isn't a sanctuary state. Texas law enforcement supports and assists ICE, and Texas government officials don't encourage protests (and would tell protesters, if asked, not to obstruct and not to resist arrest). So there is no major conflict, minimal protest, and essentially no news coverage.
Minnesota government officials, on the other hand, seem to be interpreting 10A well beyond any precedent I ever heard of, and don't seem particularly interested in the consequences of the Supremacy Clause. In fact they have repeatedly falsely claimed that ICE are "not real law enforcement".
Immigrants? or illegal immigrants? There’s a huge distinction between an immigrant coming with a visa/green card with a set job and education (net positive to the country)
Agreed. If this were about enforcing immigration law, they would first focus on red states with huge immigrant populations, where they would have full cooperation from the local government and citizens who overwhelmingly voted for Trump. Those supporters who care about enforcing immigration laws would directly benefit.
This is obviously violence directed at Minnesota, who is led by a political opponent. It’s capital F Fascism and everyone on the right has grandfathers that are ashamed of them.
You can be pro-immigration enforcement, while also anti whatever-the-fuck-this-is.
It's called being pro-rule of law.
You're not allowed to just shoot people in the back that are very obviously not a threat, even if their idiotic lack of proper training makes them feel like they're in danger. It's literally South Parkian "they're coming right for us!!!" -- BANG -- as justification for lethal force of an unarmed person in custody.
The mainstream media is not covering the many daily protests I see in my area, and hear and see from friends and family elsewhere. However, I do think the majority of Americans do not have the luxury (or fear of losing their job, and thus their healthcare, etc) to just walk out on their jobs or responsibilities, and the social safety nets here are limited (and being further cut by this administration).
I do think a general strike is the last chance at a non-violent resistance, but the oligarchs and powerful can weather that storm much more easily than the average American.
Then why isn’t ICE in the states with the most immigrants?
They are. (see e.g. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/are-cities-ice-raids-ar...) And they have been, the whole time.
ICE has arrested and deported far more people from Texas than Minnesota (e.g. https://www.texasstandard.org/stories/texas-immigration-crac... https://www.newsweek.com/map-shows-states-ice-arrest-immigra... https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/politics/im... many other sources can easily be found).
You don't hear about it so much (unless you go looking) because Texas isn't a sanctuary state. Texas law enforcement supports and assists ICE, and Texas government officials don't encourage protests (and would tell protesters, if asked, not to obstruct and not to resist arrest). So there is no major conflict, minimal protest, and essentially no news coverage.
Minnesota government officials, on the other hand, seem to be interpreting 10A well beyond any precedent I ever heard of, and don't seem particularly interested in the consequences of the Supremacy Clause. In fact they have repeatedly falsely claimed that ICE are "not real law enforcement".
Oh, good to know. Executing law abiding citizens in cold blood is fair game then.
Immigrants? or illegal immigrants? There’s a huge distinction between an immigrant coming with a visa/green card with a set job and education (net positive to the country)
logic would indicate that its either (or both) (1) its not about immigration (it's about power and control thru fear) or (2) they're idiots
> logic would indicate that its either (or both) (1) its not about immigration (it's about power and control thru fear) or (2) they're idiots
Let's not forgot and/or (3) going after Minnesota voter roles (per this letter from Pam Bondi):
* https://archive.is/https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2026/...
* https://www.cbsnews.com/news/bondi-minnesota-voter-rolls-wel...
1 reply →
Agreed. If this were about enforcing immigration law, they would first focus on red states with huge immigrant populations, where they would have full cooperation from the local government and citizens who overwhelmingly voted for Trump. Those supporters who care about enforcing immigration laws would directly benefit.
This is obviously violence directed at Minnesota, who is led by a political opponent. It’s capital F Fascism and everyone on the right has grandfathers that are ashamed of them.
6 replies →
You can be pro-immigration enforcement, while also anti whatever-the-fuck-this-is.
It's called being pro-rule of law.
You're not allowed to just shoot people in the back that are very obviously not a threat, even if their idiotic lack of proper training makes them feel like they're in danger. It's literally South Parkian "they're coming right for us!!!" -- BANG -- as justification for lethal force of an unarmed person in custody.
source?
The mainstream media is not covering the many daily protests I see in my area, and hear and see from friends and family elsewhere. However, I do think the majority of Americans do not have the luxury (or fear of losing their job, and thus their healthcare, etc) to just walk out on their jobs or responsibilities, and the social safety nets here are limited (and being further cut by this administration).
I do think a general strike is the last chance at a non-violent resistance, but the oligarchs and powerful can weather that storm much more easily than the average American.
They literally voted for it.
They voted for something else, they were conned by populist messaging.
3 replies →