Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FBI arrests judge accused of helping man evade immigration authorities

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 1001 posts

Re: FBI arrests judge accused of helping man evade immigration authorities

#511

Post by pseudo0 »

kemayo wrote: post #93
mjburgess wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. It isnt clear ICE agents have any legal authority to demand a judge tell them anything. 2. It is highly likely this is an official act, since it would be taken on behalf of court, so the immigrant can give, eg. testimony in a case. A "private act" here would be the judge lying in order to prevent their deportation because they as a private person wanted to do so. It seems highly unlikely that this is the case.

I updated my post with new information from the updated article, and in the context of that I think you're pretty much right. It sounds like the judge basically said "you need permission to arrest someone in the middle of my hearing, go get it" and then didn't change anything about the process of their hearing while that permission was being obtained. This was definitely not them being helpful , but I'm incredibly do…

That is not what is alleged in the complaint: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wied.11...

The allegation is that the judge got upset that ICE was waiting outside the courtroom, sent the law enforcement officers to the chief judge's office, and then adjourned the hearing without notifying the prosecutor and snuck the man with a warrant out through a non-public door not normally used by defendants.

If those facts are accurate, it sure sounds like obstruction. Judges have to obey the law just like everyone else.

Re: FBI arrests judge accused of helping man evade immigration authorities

#512

Post by lupusreal »

whats_a_quasar wrote: post #213
lupusreal wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government probably has evidence, maybe or maybe not persuasive enough for a conviction. That evidence will be presented in due course, not all up front to the media.

Given the circumstances, the government absolutely does have an obligation to present its evidence up front. You cannot use federal agents to arrest officers of a state government unless the charges are rock solid. There is a strong public interest in this case and the current administration has shown that it is owed zero deference or presumption that it is acting in good faith.

> the government absolutely does have an obligation to present its evidence up front

In your opinion, but not according to the law.

Re: FBI arrests judge accused of helping man evade immigration authorities

#513

Post by ClumsyPilot »

hypeatei wrote: post #491
kstrauser wrote: post #406

Part of the reason why I support "sanctuary cities" is that it's better for everyone if undocumented immigrants feel safe talking to the police. Imagine someone broke into my car and there was a witness who saw the whole thing. I want them to be OK telling the cops what happened. I want them to be OK reporting crimes in their neighborhood. I want them to be OK testifying about it in court. I want them to be OK callin…

This line of thinking only works if you consider illegal immigrants as people of which a certain side does not and is actively arguing that the bill of rights only applies to citizens. Basically, if you view illegal immigrants as the end of the world, then any deferral of their deportation is equally as bad. There is no room for discussion on this topic, being "illegal" is a cardinal sin and must be punished at all c…

> bill of rights only applies to citizens.

I could argue that it’s inhumane, contradicts all the values US claims to stand for, or could be used as a back door to harass citizens.

But ultimately fundamental issue is this - if you want to be a seat of global capital and finance, a global reserve currency and the worlds most important stock exchange, that is the price. Transnational corporations, their bosses and employees have to feel secure.

That is the only reason (often corrupt) businessman take their money from Russia, China, and other regimes that do not guarantee human rights and bring it to the west.

Re: FBI arrests judge accused of helping man evade immigration authorities

#514

Post by whoknowsidont »

trelane wrote: post #500
whoknowsidont wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Arrested by the FBI on behalf of claims from ICE. For not detaining someone extra-judicially in her own court room. There was no need to arrest someone here, especially a judge.

> For not detaining someone extra-judicially in her own court room. This is not the charge, fortunately. The charges are listed in the paragraphs I quoted.

Why would you expect the charge to spell out its own unlawfulness? Don't be obtuse.

For juxtaposition, the "Cash for Children" Judges were issued a summons.

Re: FBI arrests judge accused of helping man evade immigration authorities

#515

Post by MattGrommes »

kelseyfrog wrote: post #390
pc86 wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain how this action reasonably leads to gunfire?

GP wasn't saying that one leads to another in a causal sense - simply that there are levels of dysfunction and this step is closer to the dysfunction of gunfire than the previous level.

Exactly. One of these days somebody is going to use a gun to defend someone from these masked/unmarked/unwarranted kidnappings.

Re: FBI arrests judge accused of helping man evade immigration authorities

#516

Post by magicalist »

bananalychee wrote: post #462
gitfan86 wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

[flagged]

> On one hand I find the current administration's approach to deportations too heavy-handed, but on the other hand it seems almost necessary because of the level of obstruction at the judicial level compared to the Obama era

This is just "ends justifies the means" via hand waving. If you claim to have principles at least stand by them.

Re: FBI arrests judge accused of helping man evade immigration authorities

#517

Post by NoMoreNicksLeft »

openasocket wrote: post #450
NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That would really depend on what the judge did, though. It would, of course. But we don't know what the judge did, and yet everyone here is interpreting the events in the least generous way possible. Next week, when there is another incident, they'll use their least generous interpretations of what happened here as fact to justify their least generous interpretations of that incident. >If the judge said, “the guy yo…

> Or, if he just said "you all need to leave, none can stay" with the intention of hurrying the proceeding along so that the immigrant could leave before they could possibly return, that too is willful obstruction. In the fact pattern you've given, we're getting dangerously close to prosecuting a judge for official acts taken in their courtroom. The only difference is that, in your fact pattern, the judge is doing th…

>The only difference is that, in your fact pattern, the judge is doing this in bad faith, with the express intent of assisting this person evade arrest.

Which, if anyone were honest here, most would admit that they suspect that was the intent. You can't cheer on the judges who do this sort of thing as heroes upholding democracy in one thread, and turn around and in another say "well, they weren't even deliberately doing it, they're just following rules".

Can we prove the judge was acting in bad faith? I don't think that's very likely. But I'd be shocked if that wasn't really what was going on.

We're all being manipulated, you know. I still see 3 headlines a day about the "Maryland man", who isn't from Maryland.

>A bunch of ICE agents sitting in the gallery could definitely be interpreted as disruptive.

Sure, some could claim that. But I doubt they were hooting and hollering and pointing at the man, making intimidating gestures.

>If ICE was going to arrest this person in the middle of a courtroom,

Some here would claim that, but this is unlikely. They'd have waited for the proceeding to end, and followed him out the door. It still accomplishes what they want without pissing off a judge that they might need civility from next week or next year. If you're imagining they're causing trouble that won't help them accomplish what they want to accomplish simple for the sake of causing trouble and making Trump look bad... well, then what can I say?

>Police are not allowed to walk in and arrest defendants in the middle of court.

No one needs to do that. Those same police you're talking about wait until it's over, and arrest them in the hallway outside the courtroom. And they are allowed to do that. But then, most judges don't have soft spot for those criminals like they do for illegal immigrants.

Re: FBI arrests judge accused of helping man evade immigration authorities

#518

Post by dylan604 »

sophacles wrote: post #493
kcatskcolbdi wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

and something tells me the side that spent decades demonizing firearm ownership probably can't win an arms race against their ideological opponents.

What a strange set of ideas presented in such a small sentence fragment. * Very few people demonize gun ownership. They just want some laws preventing criminals from owning guns. * Guns are very easy to obtain, the "arms race" is a trip to the local sporting goods store. Sure, the weapon may not be super tacti-cool with a bunch of skulls and shit, but I'm pretty sure that even without all the virtue signalling decals…

Do you think those that have been opposed to current gun laws would be nearly as proficient at the use of their newly acquired weapon as opposed to those that have been collecting them for years?

This just made up militia will be woefully untrained to handle anything. At least those that have their meeting in the woods practice to whatever extent they do, but that would be so much more than this recent trip to the sporting goods store.

Whether you want to quibble over the words demonize, there are a lot of people that do not interpret the constitution to mean that just any ol' body can own a gun to the extent we allow today. The well regulated militia is part of that amendment, and gets left out quite conveniently. The local police departments are closer to the idea of a well regulated militia. The national guard are even closer of a match to me. The guys that run around in the woods believe they are fulfilling that role, but nobody really thinks they are well regulated other than whatever rules they choose to operate.

Personally, I do not think that what we have today with the NRA and what not is what the framers had in mind. So you complain about demonizing being wrong and clearly on one end of the spectrum. I think that the NRA refusing any limits on guns is clearly the other end of that spectrum

Re: FBI arrests judge accused of helping man evade immigration authorities

#519

Post by trhway »

tintor wrote: post #481
kstrauser wrote: post #406

Part of the reason why I support "sanctuary cities" is that it's better for everyone if undocumented immigrants feel safe talking to the police. Imagine someone broke into my car and there was a witness who saw the whole thing. I want them to be OK telling the cops what happened. I want them to be OK reporting crimes in their neighborhood. I want them to be OK testifying about it in court. I want them to be OK callin…

[flagged]

>It is not fair to all other documented immigrants.

As a properly documented immigrant i have no such feelings.

I've got great education, good job. Most of those poor illegals didn't have such luck, so if anything, the life is not fair to them, not to me.

Re: FBI arrests judge accused of helping man evade immigration authorities

#520

Post by ClumsyPilot »

Gabriel54 wrote: post #475
kstrauser wrote: post #406

Part of the reason why I support "sanctuary cities" is that it's better for everyone if undocumented immigrants feel safe talking to the police. Imagine someone broke into my car and there was a witness who saw the whole thing. I want them to be OK telling the cops what happened. I want them to be OK reporting crimes in their neighborhood. I want them to be OK testifying about it in court. I want them to be OK callin…

What is the purpose of laws if they are willfully ignored? Where do you draw the line? If the police don't care about someone's immigration status, why should they care about who broke into your car?

I am still waiting for a “corporations are people” to get death penalty
Post reply on HN