|
I mean if they're going to ignore the law they can already do that and illegally arrest people. They still have to go before a magistrate to get the order to return. I guess the judges and cops could all collude to break the law and deport whoever in defiance of it, but they can do that today.
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 15:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 16:55 |
|
|
zoux posted:Sure, here's the full text know vs suspect, and these Texan racists expect police to act out suspicions. This law does not require the arrestee to have been observed crossing a border, merely speaking only Spanish without an ID is enough to raise suspicions to an arrest tbh Like, are you claiming that each and every one of the 100,000+ people Texas has already arrested and forced onto like buses were personally observed crossing the border?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 15:13
|
|
|
zoux posted:Sure, here's the full text This is complete nonsense, by your standard nobody can be arrested for any crime unless someone directly observes it happening.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 15:15
|
|
|
The thin line between cops and referees has finally been erased
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 15:17
|
|
|
haveblue posted:The thin line between cops and referees has finally been erased How many days before we see a ref with a single blue line on their uniform
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 15:17
|
|
|
atriptothebeach posted:know vs suspect, and these Texan racists expect police to act out suspicions. This law does not require the arrestee to have been observed crossing a border, merely speaking only Spanish without an ID is enough to raise suspicions to an arrest tbh No one was arrested and put on a bus, they were all volunteers. Piell posted:This is complete nonsense, by your standard nobody can be arrested for any crime unless someone directly observes it happening. How would you prove that any given person entered the country not through a legal port of entry if you didn't see them cross. The law isn't "you can't be here illegally" the law is "you cannot cross into this state outside of the ports of entry".
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 15:18
|
|
|
zoux posted:There's only one way to know that, and it's to directly observe the person doing it. No, you're incorrect. Isn't the entire point of having legal entry routes to create a paper trail and official records of those who enter? If someone enters illegally, there will be no such official records. Without records of entry, legal residency, or citizenship, then they almost certainly entered illegally.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 15:19
|
|
|
This will probably wind up being similar to the Joe Arpaio's immigrant roundups, which basically amounted to pulling over people who looked Latino. https://www.aclu.org/news/immigrants-rights/how-people-maricopa-county-brought-down quote:Following Arpaio’s direction, deputies of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office began to target Latino drivers and passengers in cars and trucks, pulling them over on the pretext of a traffic violation and then questioning them about their immigration status. At first, deputies lurked outside of places like a church in the town of Cave Creek, which ran a day laborer center where workers connected with people who wanted to hire them. Soon Arpaio spread his policies more broadly, running his infamous immigration sweeps by sending up to 100 deputies into a neighborhood — usually a predominantly Latino one — and conducting traffic stops for an entire day or weekend.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 15:26
|
|
|
zoux posted:How would you prove that any given person entered the country not through a legal port of entry if you didn't see them cross. The law isn't "you can't be here illegally" the law is "you cannot cross into this state outside of the ports of entry". A) You don't need to prove someone committed a crime in order to arrest them B) The same way you prove any other crime that wasn't directly witnessed - circumstantial evidence like seeing they have wet clothes near the river, testimonials from others that they might have told how they entered the country or who came with them, confession after being leaned on by cops, etc
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 15:27
|
|
|
Alright well I don't agree, but here's the reality of the situation. The law is blocked until SCOTUS either permits states to enforce federal immigration laws or kills SB 4. If the former happens, you won't remember SB 4 because all the other immigration HBs and SBs passed by the statehouse next session will make it seem like nothing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 15:32
|
|
|
I think you are underestimating the downstream effects that laws and rulings like this can have on law enforcement practices. Yeah the law is legally stayed but do you honestly think it won't affect the behavior of cops?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 15:42
|
|
|
Pantaloon Pontiff posted:Pointing out that presidents like Joe Biden, Barrack Obama, and Bill Clinton, and senators like Joe Manchin don't qualify as 'leftist' under most reasonable definitions of 'leftist' is not remotely the same thing as making a 'no true leftist' argument, and is certainly not a circular argument. I'm also not really sure what you mean by 'controlled the court' - the court that produced Roe v Wade had 5 members appointed by Republicans and only 4 appointed by Democrats, and one of the two dissents in Roe was JFK's appointee while 3 of Nixon's 4 appointees agreed with the decision. I'm not talking about Joe Biden, Barack Obama, or Bill Clinton. I'm talking about the likes of FDR and LBJ, and more importantly, about the massive liberal Congressional majorities they held, which brought about liberal Supreme Courts that made a number of important rulings which dragged American law and jurisprudence well to the left of where they had been. What I mean by "controlled the court" is that Roe was 7-2, Miranda was 6-3, Brown and Loving were unanimous, Brady was 7-2, Gideon v Wainwright was unanimous, and so on. In 1950, the entirety of the Supreme Court was made up of FDR appointees and Truman appointees, and when Eisenhower picked a centrist Republican to fill a vacancy, he found to his dismay that his newly-appointed Chief Justice Warren was actually a diehard progressive deep down, one whose specialty was in rallying the various factions of the Court and persuading them to put aside their various philosophical disagreements about the role of the court. Even decades later, the Burger Court that followed is generally regarded as conservative by comparison to the Warren Court, but still gave us rulings like Chevron (unanimous), Roe, and US v Nixon (unanimous). Back then, the only people who thought the Court was broken were conservatives and white supremacists who opposed Warren's significant expansions of federal power and constitutional obligations. Despite the efforts of Nixon and subsequent conservative presidents, pushing the Supreme Court toward the right and chipping away at the numerous new precedents and principles established by the Warren Court proved to be quite a slow process, one which worked only because the left basically vanished from the national stage for fifty years.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 16:12
|
|
|
Stabbey_the_Clown posted:No, you're incorrect. Isn't the entire point of having legal entry routes to create a paper trail and official records of those who enter? If someone enters illegally, there will be no such official records. Without records of entry, legal residency, or citizenship, then they almost certainly entered illegally. Nobody ever loses records I carry my passport and all other identifying records on me at all times just in case I get mugged so I can deal with identity theft afterwards
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 17:04
|
|
|
Comer's having his (hopefully) last impeachment hearing today. https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1770460083513651627 Gotta say, don't love the optics here. Even Newsmax isn't playing along anymore https://twitter.com/Neo_Jane8/status/1770455437004959903
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 17:13
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Back when the left-of-center (can we just skip the whole "no true leftist" circular argument, please?) It's not a circular argument. Probably the biggest festering ulcer that troubles discussion here is the fact that leftism and liberalism are not compatible ideologies, they're only forced to be aligned because the third branch of ideology in the US is fascism. People keep running into this irreparable fault line between the schools of thought and then trying to ignore it or paper over it or browbeat it away, but it's still there, and it's at the heart of why a lot of things keep happening. It's why the ideological liberals in the government can't just be pressured into leftism, and vice-versa for the ideological leftists on the ground. And if I were a paranoid poster (which I'm not, no matter what they've been saying about me), I'd say that some of it is so the failures of the Democratic Party can be elided into the narrative of lazy leftists, like so: Main Paineframe posted:Despite the efforts of Nixon and subsequent conservative presidents, pushing the Supreme Court toward the right and chipping away at the numerous new precedents and principles established by the Warren Court proved to be quite a slow process, one which worked only because the left basically vanished from the national stage for fifty years. Fifty years ago was 1974, just before Carter got elected and started pushing the Democrats into what would become neoliberalism, then Reagan royally hosed everything and the Democrats again ran hard right after getting clobbered. But it's framed as "the left" just giving up for unspecified reasons (lazy) and letting the fascists take everything.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 17:17
|
|
|
zoux posted:Comer's having his (hopefully) last impeachment hearing today. https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1770476316262813882 yeah they have jack and poo poo. they can't impeach biden for giving a loan to his brother and his surviving son being a fuckup.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 17:24
|
|
|
Probably the clearest evidence yet that the polls are hosed https://twitter.com/sfcpoll/status/1770496709858099635
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 18:15
|
|
|
zoux posted:Probably the clearest evidence yet that the polls are hosed Democrats are fighting for 'their guy' and they don't want to support the other Dem against the Republican. Call me when Marylanders pick Trone Top comment is hilarious, the Bredesen double digit lead poll over Blackburn.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 18:32
|
|
|
Byzantine posted:IAnd if I were a paranoid poster (which I'm not, no matter what they've been saying about me), I'd say that some of it is so the failures of the Democratic Party can be elided into the narrative of lazy leftists, like so: And you're framing Carter's victory as a conservative Democrat just getting elected for unspecified reasons and then magically dragging the Dems to the right through unspecified methods. If I were inclined to be pointlessly rude and insulting instead of trying to have a conversation, I might call that lazy, accuse you of narrative-shifting, and leave it at that. Since I'm not, though, I'm going to write an actual response. Carter got elected because he won the primaries (which had been recently reworked to make them a lot more accountable to public opinion) and then won the general election (something that various further-left candidates before and after him had failed to do). He was a party outsider who would have had no chance in the era of smoke-filled backrooms before the McGovern Commission reforms, but was able to unexpectedly take the nomination by making his case directly to the voters and winning state primaries. From there, he went on to win the general election as well. Granted, Ford wasn't exactly a tough opponent at the time, but McGovern managed to lose to Nixon in a landslide just five months after the Watergate break-ins and two months after the burglars and direct organizers were indicted. But all that is actually besides the point, because when I talk about ideological control of the government, I'm not just talking about the presidency. What established left-leaning control of the Court for so long wasn't just Democratic presidents, but decades of virtually-uncontested Democratic control of Congress, often with massive enough margins to ensure that the conservative wing of the party wasn't able to block things nearly as easily as they can now. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 18:37
|
|
|
Lev Parnas just casually name dropping working with Senator Ron Johnson and Rep. Pete Sessions during the hearing today. Also, how every news outlet, except Fox and other RWM outlets, weren't buying his poo poo. https://x.com/Acyn/status/1770472764152877168?s=20 volts5000 fucked around with this message at 18:44 on Mar 20, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 18:42
|
|
|
zoux posted:Probably the clearest evidence yet that the polls are hosed That's not a "polls are hosed" issue, that's a "voters are idiots" issue. "I like Hogan, even though he's a Republican, I just hope people in other states elect their Dem candidates." Shammypants posted:Democrats are fighting for 'their guy' and they don't want to support the other Dem against the Republican. Call me when Marylanders pick Trone That too
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 18:54
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Nobody ever loses records As an immigrant, the US government keeps logs of every time I entered the country on their website. I guess some of that data could get lost too or something, but it’s not likely.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 19:21
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Nobody ever loses records I didn't loving say that people would be carrying around all their records on their person, now did I? I said there would BE records.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 19:35
|
|
|
Stabbey_the_Clown posted:I didn't loving say that people would be carrying around all their records on their person, now did I? I said there would BE records. And a random Texas state cop has instant roadside access to federal immigration records now? If the problem is abusive assholes arresting people for being brown, "it will all get sorted out in a few weeks once people check the records" is not a remedy. Being in jail for just a few days can mean you lose your job, no call no show buddy! Past that, no, there might not be any records. A few months ago I had to spend a morning in my states vital records office. The whole time I was there an elderly man was trying to get a copy of his birth certificate. They couldn't get it for him. He'd been a home birth like 70 years ago and welp no certificate. Same thing can easily happen today still in poor and immigrant communities. Someone like that gets arrested, woops, no records, guess you're illegal! Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 19:41 on Mar 20, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 19:38
|
|
|
Stabbey_the_Clown posted:I didn't loving say that people would be carrying around all their records on their person, now did I? I said there would BE records. There's no due process in the matter and you're not entitled to a lawyer. Who is going to advocate for anyone to even try looking for the records.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 19:49
|
|
|
It seems to me the idea was 'We can arrest and deport you because we suspect you crossed illegally. We base this suspicion on the fact that we have found no records of your legal crossing (and also the color of your skin). Kindly ignore that we didn't bother looking for the records.' It's obviously all bullshit, but there's a slight veneer of process to it that they can pretend makes it okay.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 21:24
|
|
|
Jethro posted:That's not a "polls are hosed" issue, that's a "voters are idiots" issue. "I like Hogan, even though he's a Republican, I just hope people in other states elect their Dem candidates." The thing is Hogan isn't going to win by 14 percent. There are other reasons for the poll to be off (it's early and he was a popular governor) but it's also much wronger than the polls showing Trump winning the popular vote.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 02:55
|
|
|
zoux posted:As is typical, the effects of the bill are being wildly exaggerated online. This is incorrect. State and local authorities may stop on reasonable suspicion and arrest on probable cause, and the standard for probable cause is absolutely not as high as directly observing a person entering illegally. Moreover, any transfer of arrest power to state and local authorities turns this into a typical issue of false arrest vs. qualified immunity that the victim basically always loses, rather than it being open and shut beyond state jurisdiction. You're not wrong that the consequences are being exaggerated for effect and legal residents aren't going to be loaded onto buses en masse, but you're underestimating the consequences yourself.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 04:56
|
|
|
James Garfield posted:The thing is Hogan isn't going to win by 14 percent. There are other reasons for the poll to be off (it's early and he was a popular governor) but it's also much wronger than the polls showing Trump winning the popular vote. Marsha Blackburn was losing by enormous amounts at this same time before she ultimately won by 10%. Again, we don't even have a candidate for the Dems yet. The second we do it'll be a head to head until the Democrat inevitably wins by 5-10% minimum. https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/senate/general/2018/tennessee/blackburn-vs-bredesen
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 15:41
|
|
|
When Phil Bredesen ran for governor of Tennessee in his last term he won literally all 95 counties. Everyone I know liked him as governor and thought he did a good job, even my crazy rear end uncles. One of my uncles hosts a 4th of July party that Marsha Blackburn attends every year and even he thought Bredesen was pretty good. I 100% believe that the Tennessee election was fraudulent for that seat. I don't have any specific evidence, but I've worked in our court system and governments enough not to trust the process if I don't have eyes on it
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 15:56
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1770586868205175030 https://twitter.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1770529039729492115 https://twitter.com/RollingStone/status/1770817640522481928 Jesus christ are they point shaving? Raising the retirement age is one of the most unpopular policies out there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 15:56
|
|
|
zoux posted:https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1770586868205175030 The polls can't be wrong, margin to make hard decisions (where the poor always get the short straw)
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 16:03
|
|
|
zoux posted:
If voters vote for Trump no matter what, might as well use it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 16:11
|
|
|
The DOJ and 16 states have sued Apple for abusing their iPhone monopoly.quote:The civil complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, alleges the company has illegally wielded a monopoly over the smartphone market by cutting off developers and stifling competitors with punitive restrictions. The lawsuit squarely takes aim at the company’s most popular and lucrative product, the iPhone, which has helped catapult Apple’s valuation to over $2.7 trillion and sell its devices to billions of users. The actual complaint Apple has already been forced to open up their walled garden somewhat by the EU's Digital Markets Act, which has led to them promising to allow third-party app stores, alternative web browser engines, and other changes. The claim in the second paragraph is a little odd because Apple's restrictions have demonstrably led to a more secure and better user experience- so long as you stick to Apple stuff and don't try to use your Apple stuff in ways Apple didn't anticipate. haveblue fucked around with this message at 16:19 on Mar 21, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 16:14
|
|
|
Letting a computer company become a phone company which is also a music label and music store and film and TV studio and also a TV and film streaming channel is an enormous indictment of how neutered our antitrust laws are. That’s an insane amount of anticompetitive behavior just built into that scenario that cannot be regulated out of it. Apple, Amazon, all of them need to be broken up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 16:18
|
|
|
JesustheDarkLord posted:When Phil Bredesen ran for governor of Tennessee in his last term he won literally all 95 counties. Everyone I know liked him as governor and thought he did a good job, even my crazy rear end uncles. One of my uncles hosts a 4th of July party that Marsha Blackburn attends every year and even he thought Bredesen was pretty good. Nice post Donald
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 16:38
|
|
|
I would like to know if Bredesen screwed himself by waffling on whether Kavanaugh should be confirmed. I suspect his loss was more about Tennessee being very different than when he had his last term in office (which was 7 years before the 2018 Senate race), but that seemed to mark the beginning of the slide to defeat and his stance was a personal disappointment for me. I do remember reading how Kavanaugh's hearings were a bit of a mobilizer for many GOP base voters, too. I do not know if there was anything Bredesen could have done differently to lead to a different outcome. It was a big Culture War rallying point and Bredesen probably needed less of that for a path to victory. Eric Cantonese fucked around with this message at 16:51 on Mar 21, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 16:48
|
|
|
selec posted:Letting a computer company become a phone company which is also a music label and music store and film and TV studio and also a TV and film streaming channel is an enormous indictment of how neutered our antitrust laws are. That’s an insane amount of anticompetitive behavior just built into that scenario that cannot be regulated out of it. Apple, Amazon, all of them need to be broken up. Is it really anticompetitive for a company to have it's fingers in so many pies? Because I always thought anticompetitive meant a company buys out all it's competitors. As far as I know there's still plenty of music streaming services and movies studios besides Apple. But maybe I'm missing something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 17:12
|
|
|
Charliegrs posted:Is it really anticompetitive for a company to have it's fingers in so many pies? Because I always thought anticompetitive meant a company buys out all it's competitors. As far as I know there's still plenty of music streaming services and movies studios besides Apple. But maybe I'm missing something. It’s anticompetitive because you run the store a lot of people buy music from, but you also sell music that you have paid to have created alongside that. Which means there’s tons of incentives to promote that music over stuff an outside label created, and much less friction for your internal business units to work with each other, vs an external label trying to get the same treatment. It’s the same for every other kind of media: you sell ebooks, and for SOME REASON, your competitor app that also sells books can’t sell ebooks in their app, which means I have to then go to my browser instead to make those purchases, which creates unnecessary friction and is an anticompetitive practice.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 17:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 16:55 |
|
|
Charliegrs posted:Is it really anticompetitive for a company to have it's fingers in so many pies? Because I always thought anticompetitive meant a company buys out all it's competitors. As far as I know there's still plenty of music streaming services and movies studios besides Apple. But maybe I'm missing something. It's anticompetitive to use a dominant market share to leverage yourself artificially into other markets. Apple is extremely anticompetitive
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 17:17
|
|