ICE protester says her Global Entry was revoked after agent scanned her face

Global Entry and Precheck revoked three days after incident, court filing says.

See full article...

 

[graylshaped]

Weasel words against students in the US on visas is disgusting in the first place, but doing the same thing to citizens is infinitly worse.

The Constitution by and large considers basic rights as accorded to persons. Even you, should you visit. I'm well aware it is pissing people off by pointing out that deciding some categories of people are worth more consideration than others is sort of Trump's gig, and it really isn't a good look to do the same thing, just to people we don't like or agree with instead of people that Trump thinks aren't his type.

I'm going to keep doing it, though.

 

[graylshaped]

With all of these citizen’s rights violations happening, is there any traction on taking these grievances to court? I hear people saying they’re going to but no news out let reports on it? I suppose the only time we’ll hear about it is if someone has a successful outcome suing the federal government. I was just wondering if the courts are shutting these cases down because the feds have been given a blank check to act like fascist thugs.

Minnesota has been obliged to bring in judges from (at last count) four other states to help deal with the deluge of actions.

 

[graylshaped]

You are incorrect. If they are engaged in operations and you impede their operation you are committing a crime. They have jurisdiction to make an arrest. And merely alerting people to their presence is impeding.

Says who?

 

[graylshaped]

I have traveled extensively in Canada, Europe, and Japan. Entering a country lawfully, carrying a passport, and respecting (and being knowledgeable of) the laws of the country you are visiting is an absolute: if you cannot behave properly--by the standards of the local authorities--do not go.

Please don't be alarmed by pointedly, intentionally alarmist coverage of a small number of people behaving badly, on behalf of people who did not enter the country lawfully, did not have a passport or visa--or had a visa but did not have the courtesy to leave when the visa expired.

I believe the poster is an ex-pat, and if he or she is uncomfortable coming in the current environment, choosing not to come is their choice to make. Personally, I am choosing to go visit my own ex-pat family member who lives abroad this summer, not out of any political concern but because it is my turn to be the one traveling.

 

[graylshaped]

ICE and CBP aren't police.

(Yes. They love to put 'POLICE' tactical patches on their uniforms, but it's an outright lie. They do it because actual police have more actual law enforcement authority than ICE and CBP "officers" do -- you might call it "stolen authority".)

We don't even need to make up a phrase. The statutory language is "color of authority" or "color of law" and it is a crime in many if not all states and also under federal code, referring to the abuse of authority beyond authorization. When such abuse is deprivation of rights because of protected status, it is... well, I'll let 18 U.S. Code § 242 say it:

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

That is an infraction in addition to the abuse itself.

 

[graylshaped]

And all of the above can arrest you if you interfere with or assault them.

That's a bold word choice, Cotton.

 

[graylshaped]

Edited to protect myself.

Let's just say if you were here you wouldn't have such a cavalier attitude.

It's also textbook IANAL fodder. Generally traffic laws require you to follow directions of "public safety individuals" or similar intentionally broad wording, and whether we like what they are doing or how they are doing it or not, ICE meets that requirement. In my region many larger cities employ Traffic Control Operators (TCOs) or similarly named individuals who operate under the direction of city police but are most definitely NOT police but whose direction you are most certainly obliged to follow. I'm not even sure if they qualify as having been deputized. It's a choice I support--not much point in allocating limited police resources to directing flow on city streets around stadiums on game day even when the activity is paid for by the event operator.

 

[graylshaped]

Law abiding citizens won’t join your crusade showing them unhinged people following and harassing ICE on the street, in restaurants or at church.

Dunno about that. ICE just shot and killed two law abiding citizens.

We do know about your background, by the way. It did not include any effective civics guidance.

 

[graylshaped]

I don't think most of the left in the US is against responsible gun ownership. I certainly haven't heard that. What they want is for the responsible part to actually be enforced.

Meanwhile I have definitely heard right wing politicians start telling everyone about how the left wants to take people's guns away every time there's a mass shooting and calls are made to reign in gun laws so maybe that doesn't happen next time. I'm pretty sure that's mostly just a cynical tactic to gain votes, which unfortunately some of the crazier politicians and a decent part of the base has actually started believing.

Notwithstanding where it lies on that fuzzy left-right spectrum, my perspective is the "well-regulated" part about bearing arms needs more TLC.

 

[graylshaped]

Ditto... I bet I will be sent back home for sharing some overly funny Trump memes.

Seeing the officer trying not to laugh when he sees those may be worth it though...

Why on god's green-ish Earth would you assume ANY TSA indoctrinee has a sense of humor that isn't maliciously geared to consider him a sacred cow beyond reproach?

 

[graylshaped]

Solution: Vote accordingly. Meanwhile, law enforcement does what law enforcement is tasked to do. Give them grief, and they'll do what they can legally do to lessen the suffering so that they can do their jobs.

Their "job" isn't what you say they think it is.

 

[graylshaped]

I must be talking to a bunch of bots at the end of this thread. Could you please provide some examples to support your claims, so we have something to discuss?

All I'm getting is that you disagree with... things, I guess.

When you are wrong from first principle, it is challenging to know where to start. Try these.

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/
https://www.policechiefmagazine.org/who-will-watch-the-watchers/
https://portal.cops.usdoj.gov/resourcecenter/ric/Publications/cops-w0875-pub.pdf

Your turn. Provide one single citation supporting your contention that LEO are beyond reproach.

 

[graylshaped]

Yes, and that was in violation of existing law. About enthusiastic as you can be. He had existing law he could've used to unilaterally stop the US from resupplying Israel's genocide. Kamala refused to say she'd do anything different.

When the opponent was talking with glee--or enthusiasm, if that word is the one we're currently using--about his plans to profit from building resorts on the rubble, this coulda-shoulda-woulda corpse-beating is something worse than non-productive.

 

[graylshaped]

There are those of us who are aware and alarmed, but just don't know what to do about it. Calling our representatives won't accomplish anything. So other than taking up arms, what do you suggest we do?

Campaign for your representative's opponent? In the primary, if needed.

 

[graylshaped]

Okay, so I suppose the revocation was challenged, and the result was that it was continued. Appeal it I guess? Or go to the slow line. Again, a lot about not much. No crime here.

Kristi Noem approves your message.

Good thing, because otherwise she;'ll shoot you.

 

[graylshaped]

There is a difference between warning people to not break the law and warning law breakers so they are not apprehended.

What law is being broken? What clear and present danger does a fruit vendor represent that you think faceless, process-free Brute Squads should roam unhindered?

You represent what I heard Andrew Zimmern describe as the tribalization of pain and compassion. You are unable to feel compassion for the pain of anyone not part of your tribe. There was a time, wresting Civilization out of Nature, when that trait was beneficial to survival.

Now our survival depends on evolving past animalistic knee jerk rejection of people Not Like Us and I will drop this soapbox in front of anyone anywhere on the political spectrum acting against that principle.

 

[graylshaped]

Lol the lengths you guys will go to to defend literal child killers is pretty fucking flabbergasting. Oh, did I hurt your feelings by not describing Biden’s eyes-wide-open support for the murder of hundreds of thousands of children as “reluctant”?

Fuck your feelings - you are defending deliberate perpetrators of the mass murder of children.

Go. Fuck. Yourself. And. Every. Other. Person. Who. Has. Defended. These. Morally. Bankrupt. Politicians.

EDIT: of course you will ignore the news that came out this morning showing the Biden Administration silencing his own State Department as they warned about famine in Gaza, because it “wasn’t a balanced picture”.

And I bet you are super upset about the Epstein files, (good!), but can’t find time to be bothered about a genocide of mostly children - that was a PRAGMATIC genocide, right?

Strong words.

Where, by the way, the fuck is your preferred candidate? And I'm still waiting for you to describe the semantic difference between a MAGA supporter's use of "leftist" and your chosen pejorative use of "centrist."

 

[graylshaped]

You honestly think if I run into a crack house minutes before the DEA blowing a barn it’s protected free speech? OK

I would say if that's what you want to do, knock yourself out.

 

[graylshaped]

US Citizen here - I have nothing to worry about...because I am legally here.

ICE is enforcing our immigration laws by removing those who are not legally permitted to be here. Unfortunately, there are apparently many who cannot grasp this very simple concept.

This person got their privileges revoked by interfering with this process, the exact one that we voted on during the last election. None of this is a surprise. A better way to go about objecting to the enforcement of our laws is to win an election and a majority of mindshare, not get in the way of ICE agents doing their jobs and removing those who are not legally here.

ICE has detained my mother-in-law, naturalized around forty years ago, twice for more than an hour, leaving an eighty year old woman sitting on a curb expecting to be zip-tied and shoved into a van, before releasing her with no explanation and no apology. Her daughter, born here and a lifelong resident, now carries her passport with her in case she is arrested for Living While Brown.

ICE is not doing what you falsely claim they are doing. ICE is using that as a pretext for normalizing the seditious belief that petitioning the government for redress deserves punitive retaliation.

 

[graylshaped]

You're assuming that we'll have midterm elections, and that they won't be rigged.

Some of us are actively working to ensure that they will happen and will not be rigged. Have you looked into whether your county would take you on as an election worker?

 

[graylshaped]

I don't expect it to really solve the problem, but I do expect it to stop the bleeding. The hope is that if the Democrats gain control of congress, then Trump won't be able to keep using emergency powers that are supposed to be contested and checked by Congress.

And that's honestly all I expect from the dems at this point. They're such a failure of a political party that I don't think they could consolidate themselves enough to actually undo all of the harm of this administration even with full control of congress.

Bear in mind there is "control" and there is mere majority status. Vetos will always be out there, and the GOP will bend every effort towards painting obstructionism as "See! We TOLD you they couldn't fix anything," having not learned that even Mitch now rues his complicit actions.

 

[graylshaped]

If you stand outside the purported crack house and shout "DEA is here! DEA is here!", it is most definitely protected speech.

I wouldn't play his game. It's not a good faith analogy. If you have been tasked with performing lookout functions, then RICO will loop you in, if not valid aiding and abetting charges.

 

[graylshaped]

Not everyone is privileged enough to be able to take off work to volunteer.

Many positions are paid. My sister has been an election judge for decades; I had an admin assistant once who requested (and I granted) time off every election to do the same here in California for many, many years.

Once upon a time, I'd have suggested you contact N.O.W. but they have stepped back a bit from taking on elections as a core issue and I truly don't know who--if anyone--has filled that void. Anyone else have ideas?

 

[graylshaped]

So wasn’t zip tied and wasn’t shoved into a van? When she was verified she was released. And your problem was a lack of an apology?

Have you ever taken one of those assessments, often incorrectly called personality types, that are more geared towards helping understand how one gathers and processes information, and maybe how one interacts with others of similar or different styles?

I think you need to do that, because you are doing none of those things in a manner that is working well for you here.

edit: In good faith, I'll answer your rhetorical question regarding what my "problem" was with the situation by repeating what I said that somehow left this a question in your mind: "ICE is using that as a pretext for normalizing the seditious belief that petitioning the government for redress deserves punitive retaliation."

Capisce?

 

[graylshaped]

It wasn't "OBVIOUSLY" a typo, or I wouldn't have commented on it. I recommend you don't put words in peoples' mouths or assume bad intent here, especially when you are the one who made the mistake. If you want people to take you seriously, you need to behave seriously here. Typos aren't a big deal, but taking it as a personal insult when you make a typo and then insulting the person for assuming the meaning-changing typo was intentional is what's petty. YELLING ABOUT IT is also petty.



Pointing out that the words you chose have a different, incorrect meaning is hardly a 'pointless quibble'. Just because you don't like that your poor choice of words made your commentary factually incorrect doesn't mean my correcting them is pointless or quibbling. It means you need to choose your words more carefully. Loathe as I am to paraphrase Scalia, words have meanings.

The Global Entry program does not claim to make any changes to your rights under the Constitution, including your 1st Amendment rights, so I don't know what you're talking about, here. 'Irrelevant information', indeed.

What the Global Entry program's background check is for is determining, based on your profile, whether you pose or could reasonably pose a threat to the US government or the people by virtue of your travel and activities. This includes whether you've traveled to countries known to generate radicalized terrorists, as well as whether you've ever tried to violently overthrow any government, including the US government especially, among other things.

All travelers that are allowed to board mass transit like airplanes are deemed safe travelers... that should be obvious by the fact that TSA and airport (or whatever transport hub) security allow them into the premises and to board the mass transit. But not all travelers are afforded a predetermined status of "known safe" traveler for the purposes of expedited transit across national borders.

The US Government sets the rules for transit across its national borders, and thus it can choose, at its own discretion, to create programs like Global Entry (or CLEAR, or NEXUS, or any other program) to expedite or wave the enforcement of these rules. It can also, at its own discretion, disqualify people from participating in these programs for whatever reason it chooses to, so long as none of those actions violate any existing, superseding laws or a citizen's or state's Constitutional rights.



I'm starting to wonder if you actually read the comments you've been replying to. I have not defended anyone's behavior here, least of all ICE or the federal government. Can you please re-read and point out where me describing what the Global Entry program is qualifies as 'defending their behavior' (whoever 'their' refers to here?) or worse, the insulting 'fascist apologism' you're accusing me of?

Note, this is a rhetorical question, because I know you can't, since it doesn't.

And just so you can't continue to hide behind a lack of understanding nuance any further, I don't, and have never in this thread agreed with the relevant US government officials' decisions regarding the article subject's revocation of Global Entry permissions, which, based on what the article says, smacks of retaliation for protected activities.

Oh, man, I saw the distinction you were trying to make and thought "this room isn't in the mood for 'well ekshually" on this..."

Good for you for trying it. It's kind of invigorating, huh?

 

[graylshaped]

All the left does is reshape the narrative with misstatements and falsehoods. Then take issue with those that disagree. And finally take shots at personalities, wealth, education and appearances. Why not stick to the issue?

You seem to have a very dubious grasp on what the issue is.

What, in clear and simple terms, is the issue as you see it? Is it reshaping the narrative that we can plainly see what happened on video from multiple angles that Noem, Bovino, Miller, and Trump have all declared to be NOT what we see with our eyes?

 

[graylshaped]

Homeboy's gonna learn today, even if it's painful for him. I guess learning cost him an ejection from the thread in this case.

Given how well attempts at repeatedly nudging multiple people away from live wires today has worked, no. My optimism about human nature is tempered by the practical reality that many people not only do not learn from the mistakes of others, they blame those others for their own mistakes. The sad part is knowing that's who they are while asking if they are sure they want to play with those wires labeled "high voltage."

edit: also, in the post above me, ixnay on the oopidstay language...

 

[graylshaped]

In President Obama's November 20, 2014, address to the nation on immigration:

"Undocumented workers broke our immigration laws, and I believe that they must be held accountable – especially those who may be dangerous. That’s why, over the past six years, deportations of criminals are up 80 percent. And that’s why we’re going to keep focusing enforcement resources on actual threats to our security. ... Felons, not families. Criminals, not children. Gang members, not a mom who’s working hard to provide for her kids."

From the same speech:
"If you’re a criminal, you’ll be deported. If you plan to enter the U.S. illegally, your chances of getting caught and sent back just went up."

But Orange man bad, amiright?

Yes, Orange man bad. Did you read this bit: "Felons, not families. Criminals, not children. Gang members, not a mom who’s working hard to provide for her kids" ? It appears to have escaped your notice that stipulation didn't make it into the current build.

You get how that's different, right?

 

[graylshaped]

The Constitution does not protect incitement to riot. This has been settled case law for nearly two centuries.

Trump's behavior was criminal.

Trump actively engaged in sedition and conspiracy. His seeking co-option of the pro forma ratification of the EC report to Congress was high treason at worst, and in direct violation of his oath of office, regardless of his failure to act to forestall an assault on the Capitol, at best.

 

[graylshaped]

1A doesn't allow you to talk about a criminal fucking conspiracy.

So... don't take notes?

 

[graylshaped]

I’m really fucking sick and tired of this bullshit doomerism. If what you said had any merit, why are democrats still winning elections?

I am officially coining the phrase "Ok, doomer."

 

[graylshaped]

Republicans also sure aren't acting like the fix is in. If it was, why would they bother with all this panicky last-minute redistricting?

On the other hand, the elections just held in Texas suggest the re-districting isn't working the way they hoped

 

[graylshaped]

That's the hazard of redistricting, at least the way they're doing it. You create more seats that lean toward your party, but you also dilute your margin in what would otherwise be safe districts. It potentially leaves you vulnerable to a wave election, although that's not really a realistic concern in Texas.

I refer again to the actual recent results in Texas.

Note that's results plural...

 

[graylshaped]

The first one is a state Senate seat, though; did they even redistrict those? I thought it was just their US districts.

Regardless, people promise me Blue Texas every election year and every year the state just gets more red, so I'm not going to get my hopes up. I'm pretty sure the governor would burn the state to the ground before letting it go blue.

Oh, I'm with you on not reading too much into it. As for Abbot burning the state to the ground, that is a tempting offer...

 

[graylshaped]

Easy... Because I still believe in humans being human. You have to use the flexibility part of your executive functions to see it though.

Edit: just dug a bit in my memory. I used to travel to the states a lot for work. I was still young, had all my hair and was pretty skinny. Especially to American standards. Had a very nice conversation with a TSA officer. According to my colleague she said I was cute... Definitely human...

I don't know if that beats the time the Chinese analog to the TSA pulled me aside and a female agent at the Beijing airport searched me extremely thoroughly, while her also female counterpart, automatic weapon at the ready, watched, smiling. The shorts I was wearing made access to all... subject areas, shall we say, readily available.

I toyed with the idea of asking if I needed to buy her dinner as she concluded, but chose to simply bow politely and move on.