Comment by account42

11 hours ago

> How does "tracking ICE" _prevent_ the enforcement of the law? Your views on the first amendment suddenly became quite narrow.

Because the whole point of tracking ICE is to help people dodge them. It's absurd that people cry foul when the government goes after people actively opposing the rule of law.

> Because the whole point of tracking ICE is to help people dodge them.

Seems completely reasonable given ICE is murdering, arresting, and deporting citizens and legal residents.

The government wronging 1 person to rightfully enforce the law on 10 is unacceptable.

> It's absurd that people cry foul when the government goes after people actively opposing the rule of law.

I expect the vast majority of government abuses in recent history the world over have to at least some degree followed the law according to those carrying out the acts. Thus it is almost to be expected that as a situation escalates those crying foul might occasionally find themselves opposing the rule of law as described by those in power.

To state it plainly, not all "rule of law" is subjectively equal.

Law enforcement only works when the people have trust in those doing the enforcement.

ICE have lost the trust of a significant portion of the people in Minnesota because they are using unreasonable force, eroding constitutionally protected rights and behaving with impunity.

They are, in reality, just conducting a politically motivated campaign of harassment. If they truly wanted to deport as many people as possible they'd start with border states like Florida and Texas, places with 20x more undocumented immigrants.

  • > because they are using unreasonable force

    They have not used the same force in other states, because the resistance to their presence and purpose has not been so strong as to motivate it.

    > eroding constitutionally protected rights

    Narratives surrounding this are ignoring clear causes of action that are not in fact constitutionally protected, instead pointing at things protesters did that are constitutionally protected but not in fact related to arrests.

    > and behaving with impunity.

    The judicial system takes time.

    > If they truly wanted to deport as many people as possible they'd start with border states like Florida and Texas, places with 20x more undocumented immigrants.

    They did, and it's very easy to find out that they did using a search engine. And to address the other child comment, they also have gone after employers before. See e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46783450.

  • Or, get this - they'd go after the people who employ illegal immigrants en masse in those states.

    Illegal immigrants aren't a thing at any meaningful scale if there aren't people willing to hire them.

    But since a lot of those businesses that hire illegally or "look the other way" are BIG republican donors in deep red states....we can't do anything about it.

    We should have made e-verify the federal minimum standard for ALL employment as far back as 1985. We had the tech and the ability.

    Y'all honestly think Donald Trump hires blue-blooded WASPs to mow the lawns at his golf courses?

    • > Or, get this - they'd go after the people who employ illegal immigrants en masse in those states.

      This is not economically feasible, the cost of food would double or more. They know that and I know that. That’s why they aren’t actually targeting illegal immigrants, America’s dirty secret is that we need them to keep prices low on certain things.

      Good luck finding Americans that will pick strawberries or work in a meatpacking plant for $12-16/hr

      1 reply →

Which law makes it illegal to track ICE? If there isn't a law against it, but you think the government should arrest people for it anyway, then you don't support rule of law.

  • The obvious retort is "obstruction". Of course it doesn't hold up to scrutiny because courts have consistently held that obstruction has to be a physical act. Simply being nearby, filming or calling them names doesn't count.

    • There is clear video evidence of many incidents of protesters physically being in the way of officers, and attempting to remain in their way. I would say that I can see it in the majority of video footage of the incidents we're supposed to get outraged about. It is clearly seen in the cases of both people who were shot.

Rule of law? Innocent people are being shot.

  • Wile I don't think they deserved to loose their lives over it, calling them "innocent" is quite dishonest. They were at the very least intentionally being a nuisance and in most cases breaking actual laws in the process.

    • > They were at the very least intentionally being a nuisance and in most cases breaking actual laws in the process

      Pretti was breaking zero laws. You’d have to do some prosecutorial voodoo to conjure up a misdemeanor.

      There is lawbreaking in that videos. But the felony-level stuff is all from folks in uniform. (Which, thankfully, they’ve started wearing.)

      1 reply →

    • > calling them "innocent" is quite dishonest

      You're not actually arguing that American citizens shouldn't be able to film the cops are you? That would be pretty un-American.

      2 replies →

    • Being a nuisance is not illegal. In the eyes of the law, someone being a nuisance is, indeed, innocent - and to say so is not dishonest.

IANAL but I don't think it's so cut and dried that creating a crowdsourced map of publicly visible ice operations is illegal. Yes such a map could be used by illegal immigrants to avoid detention. It could also be used by law abiding citizens that want to avoid the hubbub these operations cause or by legal us citizens that don't wanna be targeted just for being in the neighborhood. It seems like a decent lawyer could make a case that publishing the location of an ice operation is not the same as acting with intent to interfere with the operation.

Nonsense.

ICE are engaging in violence, warrantless forced entry to homes, at least two shootings that border on murder, they even tried to force entry into an Ecuadorian embassy.

They are detaining citizens at random, relocating them physically and in some cases releasing them; if they don't die in detention due to lack of access to medical care.

If you cannot see how these activities should be observed, documented, protested whilst still standing for professed Amercian values...

Edit: Ah excellent, downvotes without reply because facts are... uncomfortable!

Here's the sources:

https://kstp.com/kstp-news/top-news/ice-agents-blocked-from-... - Ecuadorian consulate.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/a-u-s-citizen-says-ice-f... - warrantless entry

https://www.propublica.org/article/immigration-dhs-american-... - many, many US citizens detained only for charges to vanish at the merest scrutiny

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/27/five-year-ol... - deporting citizens

https://newrepublic.com/post/205458/ice-detainees-pay-for-me... - cutting off medical care

https://abcnews.go.com/US/detainees-heard-cuban-man-slammed-... - deaths in custody