Unless and until Americans get serious about addressing this hateful administration, their violence will continue and increase. While I liked the No Kings protest, and went, it's not enough. General strike until all of them are in jail
Legally immigration officers (CBP) which is what these guys are, have the right to stop and question anyone within a border zone. This guy was in a border zone.
They also have the right to detain anyone interfering with their operations. Just because he was on the line de marking where he was allowed to protest does not mean that he wasn’t interfering with their operations.
“Define unreasonable’ is a lazy dodge. The Constitution already does, it means searches and seizures without probable cause, warrants, or due process. You’re acting like ambiguity gives agents a blank check, when in reality, the whole point of the Fourth Amendment was to stop exactly that kind of unchecked authority.
I don't know about zones or lines. But I do know that ICE agents came to my friend's bar that they owned and were asking documents from anyone in there that wasn't White. No fake DUI checkpoint scheme, no fake health inspector scheme, just straight up went in and started asking for papers.
They were asking people if they were US Citizens. If you say yes then there really isn’t much they can do as a citizen isn’t required to carry ID. If you are a Permanent Resident then you are legally required to carry proof of your status with you at all times. So asking to see that is not a violation.
You’re framing it like a polite conversation when it’s not. When armed federal agents ‘ask’ under threat of detention, it stops being voluntary. The legality of asking isn’t the issue — it’s the coercive context. People don’t feel free to walk away, which is a Fourth Amendment concern, especially when there’s no probable cause to begin with
You’re dodging again. The ‘bad hombres’ line came directly from Trump himself when defending ICE raids, it was the public justification for expanding their power. The point wasn’t whether the word ‘only’ was used; it’s that the promise was to target dangerous criminals, not random civilians. Pretending that distinction never existed is just moving the goalposts
You never actually addressed your first point that his blindness was ‘irrelevant.’ It’s not. His blindness goes directly to proportionality and perceived threat, which does matter when evaluating use of force. You pivoted into a legal lecture about border zones instead of defending your own claim
It seems that either way, arresting him and moving him (and many others I've seen) could be done more professionally, less frantically and less violently.
You can literally see the ICE agents carrying him over the blue line in the video.
Abolish I C E
Referring to him as a "rioter" is absolutely disgusting on top of how he was treated, I hate this administration with every ounce of my being.
Any due process?
“Mr. President, do you have any plans on suspending habeas corpus?”
“Who?”
Great Again!!
we have entered a new level of transcendence. He can drop N bombs and still be a hero.
What are you referring to?
The full video shows him calling an ICE agent the n-word.
Why does he have a pacifier?
trump's ameriKKKA........
Unless and until Americans get serious about addressing this hateful administration, their violence will continue and increase. While I liked the No Kings protest, and went, it's not enough. General strike until all of them are in jail
Him being blind is completely irrelevant to what happened to him. It makes no more or no less justifiable or unjustifiable.
It certainly speaks to how much of a "threat" he was, and his capacity to be a hindrance
Remember when ICE was only going to go after the "bad hombres"? Only the criminals? Pepperidge Farm remembers.
They never said they would ONLY go after anyone.
Provide proof that is what they said.
"Unreasonable search and seizure" is what The fucking Constitution says.
Define unreasonable.
Legally immigration officers (CBP) which is what these guys are, have the right to stop and question anyone within a border zone. This guy was in a border zone.
They also have the right to detain anyone interfering with their operations. Just because he was on the line de marking where he was allowed to protest does not mean that he wasn’t interfering with their operations.
“Define unreasonable’ is a lazy dodge. The Constitution already does, it means searches and seizures without probable cause, warrants, or due process. You’re acting like ambiguity gives agents a blank check, when in reality, the whole point of the Fourth Amendment was to stop exactly that kind of unchecked authority.
I don't know about zones or lines. But I do know that ICE agents came to my friend's bar that they owned and were asking documents from anyone in there that wasn't White. No fake DUI checkpoint scheme, no fake health inspector scheme, just straight up went in and started asking for papers.
They can legally do that.
Also… they were not “asking for documents”.
They were asking people if they were US Citizens. If you say yes then there really isn’t much they can do as a citizen isn’t required to carry ID. If you are a Permanent Resident then you are legally required to carry proof of your status with you at all times. So asking to see that is not a violation.
You’re framing it like a polite conversation when it’s not. When armed federal agents ‘ask’ under threat of detention, it stops being voluntary. The legality of asking isn’t the issue — it’s the coercive context. People don’t feel free to walk away, which is a Fourth Amendment concern, especially when there’s no probable cause to begin with
Did they say they would o my go after bad hombres?
You’re dodging again. The ‘bad hombres’ line came directly from Trump himself when defending ICE raids, it was the public justification for expanding their power. The point wasn’t whether the word ‘only’ was used; it’s that the promise was to target dangerous criminals, not random civilians. Pretending that distinction never existed is just moving the goalposts
" o my go after bad hombres?"
I don't think they said whatever this is you wrote, but I may have missed it.
Oh no. A typo.
Did they say they would only go after bad hombres ?
You never actually addressed your first point that his blindness was ‘irrelevant.’ It’s not. His blindness goes directly to proportionality and perceived threat, which does matter when evaluating use of force. You pivoted into a legal lecture about border zones instead of defending your own claim
There is nothing to say.
Him being blind is irrelevant to what happened to him or how he was treated.
Another lazy stone wall. Why even type a comment?
It seems that either way, arresting him and moving him (and many others I've seen) could be done more professionally, less frantically and less violently.
I am waiting on you Americans to finally snap and go the France route of protesting.
Still waiting…
Things have to get a bit less comfortable for that. Give it time.