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

Google broke its promise to me – now ICE has my data

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

781–790 of 830 posts

Re: Google broke its promise to me – now ICE has my data

#781

Post by mangodrunk »

tmoertel wrote: post #376
laweijfmvo wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people. We voted for the people who gave the power, and we re-elected them. It’s really that simple. Is it “too late” now? maybe, but we had ~25 years since this all started post 911 to react, and chose not to.

> We voted for the people who gave the power, and we re-elected them. That would be true if We The People were reliably informed when we showed up to cast our votes. However, in recent years, we have become detached from reality. "News media" companies pivoted away from keeping their audiences informed about things that mattered and instead focused on capturing audiences and keeping those audiences maximally engaged…

Have you considered that you can be misinformed? Maybe you are in an echo chamber that makes it appear others are wrong. Maybe there are legitimate concerns regarding illegal immigrants. Maybe you should try to expand your understanding of the situation.

Re: Google broke its promise to me – now ICE has my data

#782

Post by HNisCIS »

fhdkweig wrote: post #371
hn_acc1 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tracfone burners for any protests?

The laws closed that loophole a long time ago. You have to either present a photo ID to buy in a brick and mortar store or sign for the package when delivering to an address.

Not in the US, am on a burner under a random name right now lol

Re: Google broke its promise to me – now ICE has my data

#783

Post by tdb7893 »

goosejuice wrote: post #365
tdb7893 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing to note when talking about "foreigners" is that many rights in the constitution specify "persons". So citizens and non-citizens theoretically have equal rights from that standpoint. So I agree in general but it's worth noting that he was supposed to have constitutional rights to speech and against unreasonable searches.

Yes, sorry, by foreigner I mean non-citizen. Others do have constitutional rights, but the legislative and executive hold plenary powers in the realm of national security and immigration.

As far as the Constitution goes, non-citizens have the same rights as citizens (at least for all the rights given to "persons") and there's no carveout actually in the Constitution for national security or immigration. Practically you have a point given case law but even in cases of immigration and national security these Constitutional rights still apply (regardless of what any branch of either Congress or the president try to do).

You can read the bill of rights here (no mention of citizens or national security): https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/bill-of-rights-transc...

Re: Google broke its promise to me – now ICE has my data

#784

Post by jasomill »

bean469 wrote: post #633
Jimmc414 wrote: post #479

The First Amendment applies to everyone on US soil, not just citizens. That’s settled law. The government can revoke visas for legitimate immigration violations, but it’s not allowed to use immigration machinery as a pretext to punish political expression. That’s exactly what they are doing. It looks like the courts will eventually put an end to this [0] but it won’t reverse the damage that’s already been done. I’m g…

> It looks like the courts will eventually put an end to this If that is to happen, who would enforce the rulings? The DOJ is not neutral and will likely abide to the wishes of the Administration

Ultimately, Congress.

But the odds of getting the majority vote in the Republican-controlled House and 2/3 majority vote in the Republican-controlled Senate required to remove Trump from office are unlikely to be any better.

At least not until Republican primary voters start voting out pro-Trump Republicans in favor of candidates who don't pledge unwavering loyalty to a President who openly opposes institutions they (the voters) hold dear, like the free market, say, or the Pope.

Or just bite the bullet and vote for a Democrat they may agree with less, but trust more.

Re: Google broke its promise to me – now ICE has my data

#785

Post by cnd78A »

zwaps wrote: post #591
Jimmc414 wrote: post #499

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, someone in customs at an airport can be treated as functionally “at the border” with reduced protections. But you are conflating seeking entry with being present inside the country. That’s the legal line, and the Supreme Court has stated it clearly. “once an alien enters the country, the legal circumstance changes, for the Due Process Clause applies to all ‘persons’ within the United States, including aliens, wh…

If only the US would follow its laws or constitution

If only the US would follow its laws or constitution

It's not specific to US, those aren't enforced in most EU countries (eg. it's quite obvious in France).

Re: Google broke its promise to me – now ICE has my data

#786

Post by Jiro »

chimprich wrote: post #675
sojournerc wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, masks and intentionally antagonizing police doesn't scream peaceful protest

> Yeah, masks and intentionally antagonizing police doesn't scream peaceful protest They wear masks in case their political opponents take exception to their actions and hunt them down later and hurt their families. (This seems like an extremely dubious justification to me, but I've been told on HN that this is the reason that ICE wear masks, so why wouldn't it apply here...?)

They wear masks to make it more difficult to arrest them (something which doesn't really apply to ICE).

Re: Google broke its promise to me – now ICE has my data

#788

Post by sam345 »

pyrale wrote: post #540
oceanplexian wrote: post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Technically incorrect, Supreme Court precedent has held that aliens are entitled to lesser First Amendment protections while seeking to enter the United States. You could be on US Soil (i.e. entering customs at an airport) and those protections don't apply. The person in question said he was in Geneva when he received the email from Google. Therefore is a non-US citizen residing outside the country entitled to 1A pro…

To condone what happens to him, you must first condone that your government lists and identifies people attending opponent meetings. Whether the government waits for him to leave the country to violate his rights feels like a small detail in this issue. Also, if you intend to claim that us foreigners are free targets for any abhorent behaviour of your government, maybe you should rename your bill of rights a bill of…

It has nothing to do with condoning. It has everything to do with stating what the law is And what is or is what is not required to comply. And what is and what is not permitted under the Constitution. Whether you like it or not has nothing to do with anything.

Re: Google broke its promise to me – now ICE has my data

#789

Post by angoragoats »

nullsanity wrote: post #589
Jimmc414 wrote: post #557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The policy of applying US immigration enforcement actions against legal visa holders who have attended specific legal (US based) protests has been publicly reported and confirmed by many government officials and is unrelated to anyone trying to enter the country. Senior ICE officials have testified under oath in federal court that analysts were moved from counterterrorism, global trade, and cybercrime work to this gr…

Yes? Why would a government allow people who aren't citizens to come in and protest on its soil about its actions? I think that's the definition of forgein interference.

In the US, the bill of rights and specifically the first amendment unambiguously applies to anyone who is lawfully present in the country, citizen or not.

Re: Google broke its promise to me – now ICE has my data

#790

Post by lmm »

ahhhhnoooo wrote: post #754
lmm wrote: post #600

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> weird, don't you think that stance is just fear of free speech? I see it as completely unreasonable. America (of the past now?) has a history of inviting all kinds of people to discuss politics, philosophy, religion from all over the world.... but now you are scared of what people have to say? I think active political campaigning is a bit different from discussing political philosophy, and it's a major mistake to t…

> I think we're all agreed that foreigners should not be standing for office or voting in elections I don't think we're all in agreement. Do they live here? Work here? They should have a say in Joe here is governed while they do.

> I don't think we're all in agreement.

Well, fair enough, but you must acknowledge that that's the democratic consensus and the law as it stands.

> Do they live here? Work here?

The person in question is on a student visa, so (assuming they're not abusing the system) sort of but not really; they're here for a few years, and they might be doing a little part-time work to support themselves but they're meant to be here to study for a limited period rather than have already moved their life here permanently, they're supposed to intend or at least be open to the possibility of going back when their course finishes.

Post reply on HN