Court Filings: ICE App Identifies Protesters; Global Entry, PreCheck Get Revoked

Post by lazide » Sat, Jan 31, 2026, 9:06 AM UTC

NotSammyHagar wrote: post #77

lazide wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t disagree. What will (and is) actually happening is every government everywhere is rushing to get these systems setup ASAP.

But it's still awful. It doesn't matter at this moment that other governments may be doing this. We don't want that for us (and I don't want it for others either).

Post by 5ykh » Sat, Jan 31, 2026, 12:27 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #71

5ykh wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not legal to deport U.S. citizens but they have anyway. A judge in Minnesota has said that ICE has violated around 100 court orders. We are living in a personalist dictatorship. The courts are ignored when their rulings are inconvenient.

This doesn’t even remotely address the question.

Post by datsci_est_2015 » Sat, Jan 31, 2026, 5:00 PM UTC

tokyobreakfast wrote: post #74

datsci_est_2015 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Welcome to the thread! I trust your expertise, but am a little put off by your flippant tone: > getting to jump the line at the airport is a “material adverse action” This is rhetorical device of framing. I could just as easily say: > Pretending to open an online cupcake shop and pretending to be forced to serve gay people isn’t a “material adverse action” And it would sound equally ridiculous, yet the highest court…

> am a little put off by your flippant tone I love this. You: 1. Declare everyone stop talking until an actual expert can speak and educate us all 2. An Actual Expert™ enters the chat and offers his expert opinion. 3. You decide his opinion is bullshit after all, because it disagrees with what you had in mind, and accuse him of being flippant.

Post by 5ykh » Sat, Jan 31, 2026, 7:07 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #87

5ykh wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The answer to your question is irrelevant. ICE does whatever the dictator tells it to. Legal basis vs. policy basis no longer matters. The question you asked, as pointed out, is a non sequitor given the reality of what’s going on.

> The question you asked, as pointed out, is a non sequitor Not what non sequitur means nor how it’s spelled. And repeating a point in the same comment doesn’t count as pointing it out previously. To the extent there is non sequitur in this thread, it’s in jumping into a legal discussion halfway to argue the law doesn’t actually matter because you feel like it.

Post by lazide » Sun, Feb 01, 2026, 8:22 AM UTC

laughing_man wrote: post #83

lazide wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First question - CBP, as noted. Unlimited jurisdictional limits - and the courts will enforce this with whose army? As it were. ICE isn’t allowed to act on citizens either, and yet here we are.

That last part isn't true. Citizens who impede ICE officers in the performance of their duties can be arrested by ICE. That is specifically written into the law, and it's a statute that can be interpreted pretty broadly.