zlacker

>>nh4321+(OP)
Per thousands of videos on social media, it doesn’t matter what your rights are anymore, if you try to ask for them ICE will just become even more sadistic and violent, and the DOJ/government will refuse to cooperate in bringing them to justice for denying you your rights- you have no rights or recourse anymore even as a citizen. Moreover, the agents are masked and refuse to self identify as the law requires so you will never be able to say who violated your rights- they are hiding their identities because they are committing crimes. They are not police that follow laws, they are state sponsored white supremacist terrorists.

>>Univer+FB
The issue right now is that DHS are federal police not subject to any vehicle for redress of wrongs unless they break state law and are identified for criminal offenses that lose QI, but there is no 42 USC § 1983-like law for bringing civil rights violations claims against them. Civilly, they're effectively "samurai" who can do whatever they want because the courts, legislature, and executive branches are all on their side.

>>burnt-+nH1
State governors need to start deploying their national guards to keep law and order versus these masked gangs of lawless thugs, period.

>>mindsl+GU1
The federal government will happily take command of those deployments. Unlike a lot of the other illegal shit that they are doing, that is a power that they legally have.

>>vkou+9g2
In coordination with the Governor, right?

>>action+yk2
Wrong. He will federalize them.

>>vkou+gr2
Unlawfully then.

>>action+tF2
1. It's not entirely unlawful. This is a power that he has. This has been done in the past - multiple times without the consent of the governors in question. [1]

2. Because it's not clearly and entirely and immediately unlawful, and would take a court to rule about it (the courts are also fucked - SCOTUS recently ruled that lower courts are expected to defer to whatever batshit version of reality the government's lawyers are peddling) people in the chain of command can't clearly tell if the orders they are receiving are obviously illegal, and don't have good grounds to disobey them.

3. Also, that's, like, the way to civil war.

---

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Rock_Nine - When integration began on September 4, 1957, the Arkansas National Guard was called in to "preserve the peace". Originally at orders of the governor, they were meant to prevent the black students from entering due to claims that there was "imminent danger of tumult, riot and breach of peace" at the integration. However, President Eisenhower issued Executive Order 10730, which federalized the Arkansas National Guard and ordered them to support the integration on September 23 of that year, after which they protected the African American students.[4]

>>vkou+Y93
In the Little Rock case, the governor was using the National Guard to defy a Supreme Court order. That gives the president more leeway than he would have if the situation was just "no, the governor doesn't want the National Guard here".

>>Animal+rD3
It might be interesting in and of itself to force to Supreme Council to go on record with hard decisions about these things. The impression I've gotten is that they've delayed issuing any actual rulings, just lots of non-binding preliminary "advice" to lower courts. I don't know if this is them trying to politically hedge so they can unwind if the fascist takeover ultimately fails, or whether they anticipate real elections putting Democrats back in power and they want to be able to put the brakes on the autocratic executive then, or what.

>>mindsl+MK3
> or whether they anticipate real elections putting Democrats back in power and they want to be able to put the brakes on the autocratic executive then, or what.

That's the more likely hedge. Their skin won't be in the fire in the case of the first one.