If history is any precedent I think ICE agents will pivot to claiming anti-communism as a defense and be just fine.
The leaders will get nice cushy jobs in Israel as consultants.
I’m sorry. does anyone really believe that?
“in the interest of not causing division we will offer an amnesty to all personnel who assumed orders they got were lawful”
No one said that we were relying on the government to carry out justice.
It’s going to have to be different this time. We let them slide after the Revolution, the Civil War, and WWII, and it has led directly to the mess we are in now.
If we survive this, it will be imperative that there are harsh punishments for ALL leaders, and all middle management. Street level traitors may not end up in prison, but they should be forced to go to political remediation classes, where they will be properly taught about the Constitution, American History, and Critical Thinking Skills. Recalcitrant “students” can have their sentences commuted to long prison sentences if they’d prefer.
Well, the new Constitution by then at least.
To be honest if Kamela Harris won, I could have seen her or Biden “Pardoning Trump to let the nation heal”
We should carve maga on their foreheads
I’d settle for fair prosecution using the body of US law that existed up to the inauguration of Trump47.
Wouldn’t it just inaugurate him again?
There wasn’t fair prosecution of law enforcement pre trump. That’s not all because of Trumpistan. You all are so delusional.
I didn’t suggest there was, but I’ve rephrased my point about as many times as I’m willing to already.
Yes but we can dream
I’m guessing whoever made this doesn’t know much about Operation Paperclip.
Pretty sure the fascists in ICE aren’t the intellectual types who have anything to offer for scientific programs.
Ah yes that old doctrine… Reward the intelligent nazis, punish the dolts.
“Intellectual” is a bit of a stretch, because sure many had degrees, but a lot of the “science” they did was just literal torture with ko scientific method or even recorded results. I have trouble calling that actual science.
Von Braun was part of operation paperclip, and we definitely got an actual scientific benefit from bringing him to the US.
Mouth-breathing thugs aren’t exactly scientific geniuses though.
I hope they learn it before this is all over.
Not only did it work for the Nazis, it the police already have laws on the books for this purpose
It literally worked for 99.999% of Nazis. We only hung some of the top brass. And then we took the smartest ones and gave them great lives at NASA.
It’s pronounced “Ich habe nur Befehle befolgt”
I fully agree, but… this ain’t no shit post.
Yet this post is being upvoted. These communities are just AI slop and Political rants now. Rip.
You’re right. Looks like we were the shit post all along.
The real shitpost was the friends we made along the way 😌
The real post is the shits we took along the way.
The real shits we posted yesterday
Cross posted shits, every day
And saved the rest of the shits for another day.
A wonderwall of shit, if you will
It is because ice agents are fucking piece of shits. Not even worthy of being called shits more like the stain left over.
Yeah…that would be cool but…this country isn’t big on accountability.
It’s more about randomly robbing and murdering people for having the wrong skin tone.
Yep, the lesser Bush and Trump I shows that Democrats are not interested in punishing crimes committed by Republicans.
That’s because US politics is so unhealthy that political persecution is only a step away. They rather let one “no longer relevant asshole” go than risk pocking that hornets nest.
I mean the voters are the accountability. Seems like the right show up with weapons and plan A, B, and C that they have organised for the past year.
The left show up with knowledge of how to get arrested. And it’s getting frustrating to watch. We need to start asking ourselves why they do things at can’t muster half the strength for
Are you talking about libs? They’re right-wing.
There is almost zero leftism in the core of empire. It’s literally the goal of hegemonic narrative (schools, media, politicians, etc) to obscure and misrepresent leftism.
The left falls apart, the right falls in line
Please promise to yourself right now that we will not let them be forgiven. We will not let whatever centrist Democrats convince us to “move forward” and “let us heal”. These officers need to be given Nuremberg Trials. If we get control of this government, EVERY one of these ICE agents who raided or abducted even one person, get sent to prison. I hope for life.
I don’t care if they have kids, lovers, parents, friends, grandkids. After these years there will be people dead, permanently traumatized, and permanently disabled.
i like when people say these, but when communists did it we twisted it
Be it Constitutional or vigilante, justice will be served.
If only the universe worked that way
The agents that abused their authority need to be punished, but I would be more interested in punishing the people in power that enabled this mess or ignored what was going on.
Please both.
If we survive this, I absolutely plan to shame them into non-existence.
How can you shame that which is shameless?
“That is not ashamed which can eternally lie,
And with strange aeons even shame may die”
Shame them now or we may not survive this.
Well, I’m not white so I may also get deported to El Salvador.
Damn, I’m neither white nor male, so same here.
WALLS are being chosen
Thought they had qualified immunity?
Qualified immunity specifically does not apply in cases where someone’s clearly established civil rights were violated, though the criteria for that is specific. Further, it applies only to civil cases, not criminal cases. It may certainly help them in some instances, but it’s not going to be a blanket shield.
1 Was a constitutional right violated?
2 Was the right clearly established at the time of the alleged violation?
https://www.justia.com/civil-rights/government-violations-of-civil-rights/qualified-immunity/
Under this doctrine, government agents—including but not limited to police officers—can never be sued for violating someone’s civil rights, unless they violated “clearly established law.” While this is an amorphous, malleable standard, it generally requires civil rights plaintiffs to show not just a clear legal rule, but a prior case with functionally identical facts.
In other words, it is entirely possible—and quite common—for courts to hold that government agents did violate someone’s rights, but that the victim has no legal remedy, simply because that precise sort of misconduct had not occurred in past cases.
While yes, IANAL, I’m exceptionally doubtful that clearly established constitutional rights aren’t being violated by the behaviors of ICE under Trump, in many, many circumstances.
I’m exceptionally doubtful that clearly established constitutional rights aren’t being violated
Anyone who’s hasn’t lived under a rock the past decade knows clearly established means practical impunity.
Some courts have required an extraordinarily precise match between the misconduct alleged in one case and in a prior one in order to find a violation of someone’s constitutional rights.
[…]
When Baxter sued, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals tossed out his case. It held that while it was well established that a police dog couldn’t be unleashed on a suspect who was lying down, there was no case addressing someone sitting down with their hands up, as Baxter said he was doing.
From Reason
“I have previously expressed my doubts about our qualified immunity jurisprudence,” writes Thomas. “Because our §1983 qualified immunity doctrine appears to stray from the statutory text, I would grant this petition.”
The judge spoke to a point that qualified immunity critics have been making for some time: The framework was concocted by the Supreme Court in spite of court precedent. It’s a perfect example of legislating from the bench—something conservatives typically oppose.
The Civil Rights Act of 1871, otherwise known as Section 1983 of the U.S. Code, explicitly grants you the ability to sue public officials who trample on your constitutional rights. The high court tinkered with that idea in Pierson v. Ray (1967), carving out an exemption for officials who violated your rights in “good faith.” Thus, qualified immunity was born.
That doctrine ballooned to something much larger in Harlow v. Fitzgerald (1982), when the Supreme Court scrubbed the “good faith” exception in favor of the “clearly established” standard, a rule that has become almost impossible to satisfy. Now, public officials cannot be held liable for bad behavior if a near-identical situation has not been outlined and condemned in previous case law.
Though the original idea was to protect public servants from vacuous lawsuits, the practical effects have been alarming. As I wrote last week:
In Howse v. Hodous (2020), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit gave qualified immunity to two officers who allegedly assaulted and arrested a man on bogus charges for the crime of standing outside of his own house. There was also the sheriff’s deputy in Coffee County, Georgia, who shot a 10-year-old boy while aiming at a non-threatening dog; the cop in Los Angeles who shot a 15-year-old boy on his way to school because the child’s friend had a plastic gun; and two cops in Fresno, California, who allegedly stole $225,000 while executing a search warrant.
In other words, cops need the judiciary to tell them explicitly that stealing is wrong. The aforementioned police officers were thus shielded from legal accountability, leaving the plaintiffs with no recourse to seek damages for medical bills or stolen assets.
Court standards are so strict, nearly any meaningless, incidental difference suffices to grant officials cover of qualified immunity: literally the difference between lying down & sitting is all it takes to violate rights with impunity.
I’m not a defender of the concept of Qualified Immunity, my point is that it’s not an absolute shield. Even if it successfully shielded them from 100% of civil rights cases (which it objectively has not) it provides no protection from criminal charges.
I won’t argue against the idea that it covers them far more than can be rationally defended, I’m just saying it’s not an absolute shield, and (in my opinion) there is every reason to imagine that the specific group we are discussing here will routinely violate the rights of the people they detain in such an egregious fashion as to satisfy even that narrow range of criteria in a higher than you might expect number of civil cases once this is all said and done.
Even if it successfully shielded them from 100% of civil rights cases (which it objectively has not)
Objectively, the planets sometimes align, too: the odds are highly against it.
it provides no protection from criminal charges
Also exceedingly rare: we’ve only seen any decent prosecution recently. It’s likely to fail.
While that fight should continue, society has more mundane tools to ostracize & make people’s lives hell.
While that fight should continue, society has more mundane tools to ostracize & make people’s lives hell.
Oooo that’s cool
IANAA (I am not an American)
