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

ICE Agents Realize They Arrested Wrong Teen, Say 'Take Him Anyway'

newsweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 94 posts

Re: ICE Agents Realize They Arrested Wrong Teen, Say 'Take Him Anyway'

#61

Post by mcphage »

somenameforme wrote: post #49
CharlieDigital wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The moment due process breaks down -- even for actual infractions of the law -- that means everyone (you and I included) has lost due process. You should want due process for criminals because due process is how is how you can prove that you are innocent when falsely accused. There is no such thing as "due process for me, but not for thee" because one day, you might be on the "thee" end.

In the case of illegal immigration, expedited removal [1] was established in 1997, under Clinton. It qualifies a number of different groups for immediate deportation without a hearing, including anybody who has been in the country for less than 2 years - which would include the individual in this article. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expedited_removal

Expedited Removal to where, exactly?

Re: ICE Agents Realize They Arrested Wrong Teen, Say 'Take Him Anyway'

#62

Post by ty6853 »

somenameforme wrote: post #49
CharlieDigital wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The moment due process breaks down -- even for actual infractions of the law -- that means everyone (you and I included) has lost due process. You should want due process for criminals because due process is how is how you can prove that you are innocent when falsely accused. There is no such thing as "due process for me, but not for thee" because one day, you might be on the "thee" end.

In the case of illegal immigration, expedited removal [1] was established in 1997, under Clinton. It qualifies a number of different groups for immediate deportation without a hearing, including anybody who has been in the country for less than 2 years - which would include the individual in this article. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expedited_removal

And how would you know if they've been here for less than 2 years without a hearing where they can face their accuser and provide any evidence they have to refute it if untrue?

Re: ICE Agents Realize They Arrested Wrong Teen, Say 'Take Him Anyway'

#63

Post by CharlieDigital »

somenameforme wrote: post #49
CharlieDigital wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The moment due process breaks down -- even for actual infractions of the law -- that means everyone (you and I included) has lost due process. You should want due process for criminals because due process is how is how you can prove that you are innocent when falsely accused. There is no such thing as "due process for me, but not for thee" because one day, you might be on the "thee" end.

In the case of illegal immigration, expedited removal [1] was established in 1997, under Clinton. It qualifies a number of different groups for immediate deportation without a hearing, including anybody who has been in the country for less than 2 years - which would include the individual in this article. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expedited_removal

That doesn't mean you don't have due process to establish that the individual was actually undocumented. You don't skip due process. What's so hard about that? What if the individual is actually in the country with all of the correct paperwork and visas?. That's what you figure out via due process before acting.

Re: ICE Agents Realize They Arrested Wrong Teen, Say 'Take Him Anyway'

#64

Post by CharlieDigital »

ty6853 wrote: post #62
somenameforme wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the case of illegal immigration, expedited removal [1] was established in 1997, under Clinton. It qualifies a number of different groups for immediate deportation without a hearing, including anybody who has been in the country for less than 2 years - which would include the individual in this article. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expedited_removal

And how would you know if they've been here for less than 2 years without a hearing where they can face their accuser and provide any evidence they have to refute it if untrue?

It's the weirdest discussion, right?

    > "You gotta follow the law!"
Well, how do you know the law isn't being followed if there's no due process?!?

Re: ICE Agents Realize They Arrested Wrong Teen, Say 'Take Him Anyway'

#65

Post by Hizonner »

generalizations wrote: post #56
bloppe wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't have to be a red line for maga. In fact, for them, the cruelty is the whole point. They want the fear and simply don't care about laws.

> don't care about laws Look at the legal analysis, not the sensationalist story: this is IIRC preexisting legal machinery, now being used for a different purpose. You dislike how it is used; I dislike that it exists. We are not the same.

Sort of. There's way too much discretion to toss people out for any random trumped-up reason, and way too much discretion about how it's done.

But there are requirements for at least some attempt at individualized due process, and those are being ignored, which is mostly new. And there are certain reasons they don't get to use, and that's also being ignored. And probably shipping people to abusive facilities in El Salvador violates some laws that weren't being violated before.

Was US immigration law always inhumane and immoral, both as written and as enforced? Yes. Was ICE always full of thugs, and did it always tend to push to the very edge of what it was allowed to do? Yes. Have things gotten worse in qualititative ways, including violating laws? Also yes.

Re: ICE Agents Realize They Arrested Wrong Teen, Say 'Take Him Anyway'

#66

Post by somenameforme »

CharlieDigital wrote: post #63
somenameforme wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the case of illegal immigration, expedited removal [1] was established in 1997, under Clinton. It qualifies a number of different groups for immediate deportation without a hearing, including anybody who has been in the country for less than 2 years - which would include the individual in this article. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expedited_removal

That doesn't mean you don't have due process to establish that the individual was actually undocumented. You don't skip due process. What's so hard about that? What if the individual is actually in the country with all of the correct paperwork and visas? . That's what you figure out via due process before acting.

Non-citizen residents in the US are required to carry proof of immigration status with them at all times, precisely because of this scenario. Immigration officers/enforcement, in basically every country, have a substantial degree of independent discretion.

Re: ICE Agents Realize They Arrested Wrong Teen, Say 'Take Him Anyway'

#67

Post by generalizations »

Hizonner wrote: post #65
generalizations wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> don't care about laws Look at the legal analysis, not the sensationalist story: this is IIRC preexisting legal machinery, now being used for a different purpose. You dislike how it is used; I dislike that it exists. We are not the same.

Sort of. There's way too much discretion to toss people out for any random trumped-up reason, and way too much discretion about how it's done. But there are requirements for at least some attempt at individualized due process, and those are being ignored, which is mostly new. And there are certain reasons they don't get to use, and that's also being ignored. And probably shipping people to abusive facilities in El Sa…

Believe me, I'm not a fan of dystopian prison islands. However, my consistent position has been the risks of the legal machinery itself and its potential for abuse. Now I'm being vindicated and it sucks, and everyone still seems to be upset that the expansive laws they like are now being used in ways they don't like and didn't expect (cue world's tiniest violin).

What's interesting is how much of a grey area that the due process question is. Non-citizens may or may not actually legally merit due process, and to whatever degree they might, they only merit it while "within" the "jurisdiction" of the US. And as far as I can tell, that 'grey area' of how the 14th amendment is read, plus the alien enemies act, is probably legally enough to justify this - and we also have all kinds of exceptions for dealing with "terrorists" (thanks, Obama).

Lets also not forget how much legal precedent Guantanamo provides when dealing with non-citizen (or even US Citizen!) "terrorists".

I don't think you've been specific about any other laws - just a couple of guesses about 'probably violating' things.

Re: ICE Agents Realize They Arrested Wrong Teen, Say 'Take Him Anyway'

#68

Post by JohnTHaller »

wnevets wrote: post #6

why is ICE wasting millions of dollars arresting the wrong people but DOGE is cutting cancer research? Its time to abolish ICE.

They have quotas to hit to meet the Republican party's fake numbers of 'the people who are to blame'

Re: ICE Agents Realize They Arrested Wrong Teen, Say 'Take Him Anyway'

#69

Post by mdhb »

shepherdjerred wrote: post #60
helle253 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not explicitly planning on it currently, but it is something that's in the back of my head. If denaturalizations do start happening, we would have a frank conversation about what to do. I don't know that we would stay in America. The tail risks would simply be too high. I don't know, its frightening to think about. I don't think its LIKELY, yet. but i cant say its UNTHINKABLE anymore.

I agree. I really hope it doesn't get that bad, but there are still 3.5 years left...

They very very obviously at this point aren’t going to voluntarily leave office.

Re: ICE Agents Realize They Arrested Wrong Teen, Say 'Take Him Anyway'

#70

Post by Tadpole9181 »

helle253 wrote: post #57
shepherdjerred wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you planning on emigrating? Just curious. I'm starting to worry it might be the only right option

Not explicitly planning on it currently, but it is something that's in the back of my head. If denaturalizations do start happening, we would have a frank conversation about what to do. I don't know that we would stay in America. The tail risks would simply be too high. I don't know, its frightening to think about. I don't think its LIKELY, yet. but i cant say its UNTHINKABLE anymore.

You should make a plan now. If they start rounding people up, you are already on that list. I guarantee you that they will grab you faster than you can plan and execute an international move that uproots your entire life.

You don't need to act, but talk with your wife. Make a plan of where you would go, check all the requirements and start ticking the boxes, know how to apply, keep a list of what will need to come with you, etc.

Post reply on HN