phatskat 4 days ago

It’s illegal to interfere with ICE when conducting actual ICE business, but time and again they’ve been shown to be looking for people with no reason to be under investigation let alone arrest. In Pretti’s murder, they were looking for a “violent criminal” who had um….traffic violations, from years prior, and was ummm here legally? And that’s just the most high profile case. If they can’t get their shit together and actually do their job without resorting to executions of citizens and deporting children to counties they’ve never been to, then it is very much our civic duty to stand up to them.

QuercusMax 4 days ago

Ken White, AKA popehat, said that the administrative warrants the ice agents sign themselves, are the equivalent of Ron Swanson's "permit" that says "I can do what I want". They're not signed by a judge, which is required by the 4th amendment.

antonvs 3 days ago

They’re relying heavily on administrative warrants, which don’t have the legal force of a judicial warrant and are more like an internal departmental memo.

In particular, administrative warrants don’t authorize entry into a private home without consent, don’t compel state or local law enforcement to act, don’t function like a criminal warrant, and don’t override 4th amendment protections.

Having to rely on judicial warrants would get in the way of one of their primary goals, which is to pacify the US population through fear. It’s why they now use the murders they’ve committed as threats.

  • TheCoelacanth 3 days ago

    An administrative warrant is no warrant at all. It's just a lie made up to try to trick people into compliance.

    The constitution clearly says who can issue a warrant and it's not random law enforcement officers.

    • antonvs 3 days ago

      As I said, it's more like an internal departmental memo. It serves a purpose internally, but trying to use it outside of that context is mostly a category error.

      • TheCoelacanth 3 days ago

        The document itself may have an internal purpose, but there is no legitimate purpose served by calling it a warrant. That serves purely to mislead.

        • antonvs 2 days ago

          That's not correct. It's a "warrant" in the literal sense: it authorizes federal immigration agents to detain someone for civil immigration violations. Since they're not judicial warrants, there are constitutional restrictions on how they can do that, which I enumerated in my previous comment.

          The game ICE is playing takes advantage of the exact misunderstanding you've described - that anything called a warrant must be a judicial warrant. That's not the case, they're just exploiting people's bad assumptions.