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

FAA institutes nationwide drone no-fly zones around ICE operations

aerotime.aero

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 245 posts

Re: FAA institutes nationwide drone no-fly zones around ICE operations

#151

Post by ggggffggggg »

penultimatename wrote: post #121
yieldcrv wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that perspective is not backed by data, and the administration doesn't appeal everything very few supreme court cases make it to headline news, and the ones that do are the ones you're thinking about it. those are the ones split by ideological lines, which are less than 10% of what SCOTUS rules on. the government loses many cases unanimously as well. there are some unsigned opinions that do punt things back to lower…

This is literally backed by data. 21 out of 25 emergency docker cases taken up with the Supreme Court were ruled in the Trump administration’s favor. Only one of the cases against the administration was unanimous. At the appellate level, Trump appointed judges vote in favor of his policies at a substantially higher rate than any previous president at 92% of cases. https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/01/looking-back-at-20…

And the emergency docket is exactly where one should look for these very recent very blatantly illegal actions and lawsuits aiming to counter them.

So yes the data is in, and yes it’s bad, and emphatically yes it’s exactly what this thread is saying. In case anyone reading in good faith was wondering.

Re: FAA institutes nationwide drone no-fly zones around ICE operations

#152

Post by kernal »

Cornbilly wrote: post #61
gtowey wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you will be labeled a terrorist for doing so, regardless of intent.

Yeah, that’s been the GOP playbook for 20+ years. It’s only recently been used for US citizens.

[flagged]

Re: FAA institutes nationwide drone no-fly zones around ICE operations

#153

Post by kernal »

Cornbilly wrote: post #90
kernal wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

You mean the ones that we had the ability to remove in previous administrations without the need for harassing and assaulting non-criminals and citizens on the street? As for the list, do you think this DHS compiles a list of its fuckups and publishes it? I can get you some news articles if you’d like.

[flagged]

Re: FAA institutes nationwide drone no-fly zones around ICE operations

#154

Post by kernal »

UncleEntity wrote: post #97
kernal wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Here's the problem, from what I've been hearing most of the actual criminals they've been "catching" are turned over by local and state law enforcement agencies with the rest are either in the process of criminal proceedings (that pesky "innocent until proven guilty" thing) or are involved in the immigration process as dictated by law. They are literally pulling people out of judicial hearings, where the people are t…

No, blue state sanctuary cities do not turn over illegal alien criminals to ICE. They release them back into the community even though they have a ICE notice on them. ICE is then forced to track down these criminals themselves while being tracked and harassed by crazy far left agitators that do everything in their power to protect these criminals.

Re: FAA institutes nationwide drone no-fly zones around ICE operations

#155

Post by jjk166 »

assaddayinh wrote: post #86
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the hallmarks of authoritarianism is to have laws that are virtually impossible to not break. I hope this gets tested in court and declared unconstitutional for being overly vague and arbitrary. For example, Montana used to have some maximum speed limits that were just "reasonable and prudent", but they were eventually rejected by courts as being too vague (what's prudent to you may not be prudent to someone e…

Speed limits are biology and physics derived. The eye has a max speed, over which it starts to rewrite the history of what you saw. Everytime you have been "frozzen in fear" the first few milliseconds are just the eye rewriting the logs. So you take that the saccade speed ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saccade ) + speed of visual buffer reaction + reasonable time to break and you get a max speed for that. Same goes…

Weird that when you're in Nevada the eye moves fast enough for you to react when going at 80 mph but in Arizona your eyes can only move fast enough for 75 mph, and in California no ones eyes move fast enough to react over 70 mph.

Re: FAA institutes nationwide drone no-fly zones around ICE operations

#156

Post by actionfromafar »

terminalshort wrote: post #148
avidiax wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ordering violence orchestrated by the military is a core constitutional power. It's called being "commander-in-chief" of the armed forces. The ruling makes it very clear that core constitutional powers have conclusive and preclusive (absolute) immunity. Other official acts have presumptive immunity. In all cases, the motive is above question. If Trump has a fight with Melania, he can order the CIA to rendition and di…

> Ordering violence orchestrated by the military is a core constitutional power. It's called being "commander-in-chief" of the armed forces. Incorrect. The commander in chief, same as all military officers, has the authority to issue lawful orders to the chain of command below him. He does not have the authority to issue unlawful orders, and if he does, his subordinates have the legal obligation to disobey them. The…

Ok he can tell his chain of command some lies then. Same difference.

Re: FAA institutes nationwide drone no-fly zones around ICE operations

#157

Post by toomuchtodo »

terminalshort wrote: post #131
yoyohello13 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the real danger of religion. When you train people from birth to turn off their brains and submit to authority without question, this is what happens.

[flagged]

Religiosity is negatively correlated with intelligence, so it sounds directionally accurate.

Re: FAA institutes nationwide drone no-fly zones around ICE operations

#158

Post by PlatoIsADisease »

ottah wrote: post #103

This is literally been the entire purpose of all drone regulations. Hobby aircraft have never been a legitimate public safety issue, but they are an issue for the state's ability to hide. There is and will always be a public interest in recording activity happening in public places, but a majority of drone laws essentially make it impossible to legally record public events from a private drone.

When I was a child I was a libertarian. I was screaming about how these regulations were going to be enforced at gunpoint, how this was just a way for the establishment to make money, etc...

I'm not a libertarian anymore, but I can tell you, I was a genius fortune teller.

My assets performed really well ignoring economic orthodoxy about supposed 2% inflation.

Re: FAA institutes nationwide drone no-fly zones around ICE operations

#159

Post by [deleted] »

hwillis wrote: post #62
frumplestlatz wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The people of Minneapolis are defending their right to accept foreigners into their community. Do you genuinely think those people are being paid? That all those protestors don't genuinely feel that way? That the majority in that state don't, as the polls say, want those people there? If you really think that people in Texas and Florida have the right to say who gets to live in Minnesota , why?

[deleted]

Re: FAA institutes nationwide drone no-fly zones around ICE operations

#160

Post by terminalshort »

hwillis wrote: post #62
frumplestlatz wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The people of Minneapolis are defending their right to accept foreigners into their community. Do you genuinely think those people are being paid? That all those protestors don't genuinely feel that way? That the majority in that state don't, as the polls say, want those people there? If you really think that people in Texas and Florida have the right to say who gets to live in Minnesota , why?

The people of Florida and Texas do not have the right to say who gets to live in Minnesota, but neither do the people of Minnesota. The federal government has sole authority over immigration (but not to murder people while enforcing, obviously). The alternative is ridiculous and incompatible with freedom of movement within the country.
Post reply on HN