• arrow74@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Once that line is crossed it’s finally time to get serious!

      • Nursery2787@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        2 days ago

        SCOTUS: Homeland security has presumptive immunity for quartering immigrant catchers in the homes of suspected illegals. We deny plantifs request because they should have contested their anlleged immigrant status with the department of state initially. Dismissed with prejudice.

  • ooterness@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 day ago

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

  • peoplebeproblems@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    2 days ago

    Remains unclear whether the Trump administration will apply the law in this way.

    Uh gestures broadly around

    Pretty certain we can assume that it will.

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    2 days ago

    Well if warrants are off the table now, I guess we just start shooting whenever?

    Weird, but whatever. Okay.

  • techclothes@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    2 days ago

    If I saw ICE coming to my door as a minority, I would be shooting. There is no longer a gaurantee you will have a fair case before court, or even a court case at all.

    • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      They’ve forced children as young as 6 to defend themselves in court with no right to an attorney, and it’s been going on for years. The right to counsel isn’t applied to immigration cases. It’s truly insane, kangaroo court shit.

      If the interpretation that they don’t need a warrant stands, it means that ICE could walk into anybody’s home, abduct their child, accuse them of being an illegal immigrant, do a show trial, and then ship them off to Guantanamo Bay where no press is allowed. Or, for all we know, to Little St. James or anywhere else.

    • masterofn001@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 days ago

      If they “believe” a law gives them some right (to enter a home) then I “believe” I have the right to enter their body with a ballistic projectile.

  • Boddhisatva@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    2 days ago

    Why has no one bitch slapped this idiot and pointed out that there has been no declaration of war and the law in question cannot be legally invoked? Honestly, how does this clown keep getting away with this shit?

  • BassTurd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Never been a better time to end the person breaking into your house.

    Best case: you kill a terrorist and get off on self defense.

    Likely outcome: you eat a dozen bullets and die.

    No defense outcome: you get a free flight to a concentration camp in a country you may or may not have ever been to, you suffer, then you die.

    • Lemmist@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Juridical laws aren’t like physical laws. You can change them however you want. There is no any objective limitation.

      So laws work the way the master wants them to.

      • arrow74@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        Except this is written law, it’s pretty clear in the constitution. If the state refuses to respect our inalienable rights then the citizens are left with few options on how to respond

        • bishbosh@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          There have already been several rulings against the constitution for places within 100 miles of the border, it’s never been more than a piece of paper and decorum.

      • just_another_person@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Not really, I mean any Judge can impart context if either side raises the issue, all the way from the local up to federal. At the Federal level things get into constitutional law, and what exactly constitutes personal freedoms, and anybody subverting the constitution is open to criminal AND civil penalties. That’s how it’s supposed to work at least.

        In reality, these assholes are going to try and use this against people before a judge can shoot it down (they can’t preempt it, really). This is another test to try and see where things break, and what they can get away with.

        They show up, sweep you away to some hidden prison before anyone can stop them, and before a judge can outright say it’s unconstitutional (like it even needs to be fucking said), and by that time they’ve already done whatever they intended to do.

    • sneaky@r.nf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 days ago

      Probably not as much as the people trying to protect their families. Average household 4-6 people inside? They’ll send 24 then. Double that after the first agent casualty.

      • ABetterTomorrow@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        You be surprised what a family will do. Also ICE doesn’t have that many agents and there’s more community getting involved where ICE can’t drive down the street. Remember the people have more power.

      • Carmakazi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        They don’t have infinite agents. If they start sending one or two dozen agents to arrest one person, rather than the 2-6 they are sending now, that means they will be making less arrests overall.

        • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Given that this would lead to slightly less arrests but significantly more deaths, I’m not sure how this would be considered a win.

          • Carmakazi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago
            1. It would lead to significantly less arrests if they needed double or triple the agents to conduct them “safely”.
            2. More people will die only if agents or their victims start shooting on general principle. In either case, that’s a backslide that isn’t really a consequence of putting more agents on one person.
            • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              More people will die only if agents or their victims start shooting on general principle

              What do you think is going to happen when dozens of agents start raiding homes without a warrant?

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    2 days ago

    Don’t forget to stock up on hollow points. Breaking their oath to the Constitution is going to have some repercussions

      • CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        2 days ago

        checks instance name

        So there was a show called The Unit. Decent show. Not great but lots of action. It has Dennis Haybert.

        Anyway, there is an episode where they (the delta team) has to secure the president who was running away from a highly armored militia.

        His words: head and groin

        Again, the show is decent. Recommend a watch to those who are into shows like that.

        This reply isn’t related to this thread but just randomly came to mind.

    • silence7@slrpnk.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      How can you know who is in the house it is until you’ve searched to make sure they don’t have an underground railroad type hiding spot?

      /s

    • sneaky@r.nf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      2 days ago

      There’s no rules anymore. If you find a rule that stops them from protecting the regime or executing the regime’s objectives, they’ll change it. There is no point clinging to any of these written rules. We are slowly entering a war zone. None of the people who could stop this are doing it. I will say this is my own opinion (for now) as a disclaimer… But the way I see it is this: if the military doesn’t turn on trump then it will eventually become the responsibility of the citizens. We’re frogs in boiling water and I am absolutely terrified.

      • OutlierBlue@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        We are slowly entering a war zone

        Slowly?! It’s been 60 days since he was inaugurated. This isn’t slow. It’s an abrupt turn into fascism.

  • aramis87@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    2 days ago

    Trump administration lawyers have determined that an 18th-century wartime law the president has invoked to deport suspected members of a Venezuelan gang allows federal agents to enter homes without a warrant, according to people familiar with internal discussions.

    His order took aim at Venezuelan citizens 14 or older who belong to the Tren de Aragua gang, and who are not naturalized or lawful permanent residents. “All such alien enemies, wherever found within any territory subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, are subject to summary apprehension,” the proclamation said.

    Senior lawyers at the Justice Department view that language, combined with the historical use of the law, to mean that the government does not need a warrant to enter a home or premises to search for people believed to be members of that gang, according to two officials familiar with the new policy.

    • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      Wild that a lawyer would take “wherever found” to indicate you can try to find them wherever.