Hacker News
points by onetimeusename 1 day ago | 0 comments
I read the article and the facts don't match up with the title. The thesis is actually

    The Minnesota 15 case is the clearest example yet of DHS pursuing the Trump administration’s efforts to crack down on what have long been upheld as First Amendment–protected activities
But did the Minnesota 15 commit actual crimes? There's lots of hyperbole "15 terabytes of data" but in the end it centers on investigations into the Minnesota 15 and doesn't answer this question. The Minnesota 15 are not accused of ordinary protest. The article gave no evidence that these people hadn't committed any crimes it just went on and on about investigative capabilities of HSI.

Obstructing law enforcement is a crime even if you don't like law enforcement. I think it's a stretch to go from "Minnesota 15 investigated" to "ICE is a private police force used to suppress dissent". Also, there's no mention of the ~10 million people who entered illegally under Biden. Is it democratic to have open borders? I get the sense this writer believes deporting people is anti-democratic.

[–] vablings 1 day ago
> But did the Minnesota 15 commit actual crimes? There's lots of hyperbole "15 terabytes of data" but in the end it centers on investigations into the Minnesota 15 and doesn't answer this question. The Minnesota 15 are not accused of ordinary protest. The article gave no evidence that these people hadn't committed any crimes it just went on and on about investigative capabilities of HSI.

The indictment itself makes no specific mention of violence as far as I know because there was no actual violence committed. It's staggering that people are getting set multi-million-dollar bonds for what is essentially civil disobedience.

"Also, there's no mention of the ~10 million people who entered illegally under Biden. Is it democratic to have open borders? I get the sense this writer believes deporting people is opposed to democracy."

A few things to unpack with this statement. 10 million people never entered illegally, that number is derived from DHS reporting of 10 million encounters which includes people who are arrested, denied entry or removed. Also, that doesn't cover the fact that this was a recognized issue by Democrats hence why the party had the bipartisan border bill that was killed by Trump because he wanted the border as a political issue for the upcoming election.

[–] onetimeusename 1 day ago
The ~10 million were not substantially deported, they entered illegally and then were given Notices to Appear which is completely a lawyerly way to cover for it all.

The bipartisan bill would've still allowed in thousands of people per day. Some people don't want that. It wasn't even proposed until 2024. By then people might not have trusted the admin.

[–] vablings 1 day ago
Interesting in the same sentence you directly foot gunned yourself.

First of all, the bipartisan bill would have de-facto ended catch and release due to significantly ended "Catch and release" or Notice to Appear since there was now sufficient capacity to adjudicate.

You are correct 10 million were not substantially deported because a majority of them never entered at all that 10 million figure is just a downright lie. Based on the data from Title 42 expulsions around half of that 10 million were people sent back.

"The bipartisan bill would've still allowed in thousands of people per day."

Funny because if we take your (lies) about 10 million the legislation would have cut that down by 80% on just the caps alone. Increase in adjudication and the end of catch and release (if we assume all of the 2 million getaways are entirely dishonest) then it would be less than 10% of that figure.

Perfect is the enemy of good or something like that.

[–] onetimeusename 1 day ago
How many encounters are there now? DHS says it's a historical low with a 95% reduction. How many people are paroled or given NTA releases now? Sources suggest 0 in the first year. What's the asylum grant rate now? Sources suggest it's about 7% now as opposed to 65% or higher previously.

The bipartisan bill was full of loopholes and it only triggered when border crossings exceeded certain rather high thresholds. Do you realize that? It wasn't comprehensive at all. Here is an example of a loophole: "While the president’s parole authority would be narrowed, he or she would retain the power to parole entire classes of migrants and would have greater authority to do so at airports." (https://digital-release.thehill.com/?p=4447957). So this assumes Biden and Mayorkas were genuinely trying to fix the problem all of a sudden in 2024 as they were facing an election. Why would we want to codify allowing in a certain high number of people along with loopholes when we could just replace Mayorkas and Biden?

The thing is that Mayorkas WANTED the border to be open. This wasn't a mistake. It's an unofficial policy that you're dancing around. I am not interested in stupid Trump vs Democrats or GOP vs Democrats bullshit. There's a substantial nnumber of people who want large scale immigration and a substantial number who don't so all this legalistic bickering is just window dressing for this issue but don't try to pretend that it's universally the moral or democratic norm to have open borders.

[–] solid_fuel 1 day ago
> The Minnesota 15 are not accused of ordinary protest. The article gave no evidence that these people hadn't committed any crimes it just went on and on about investigative capabilities of HSI.

Actually, the way the criminal justice system works here in America is that you are presumed innocent until proven guilty. It's not the job of the newspaper to exonerate the victims of government overreach.

[–] onetimeusename 1 day ago
You're right, it's not but that wasn't what I was asking. If they are going to claim that ICE is targeting left wing movements and then use the Minnesota 15 as an example, I would want to hear about this case. If the Minnesota 15 performed only constitutionally protected speech then this investigation might be concerning but the article didn't really describe that. Could ICE have collected evidence illegally? Yes, that can be decided in a court. I am just a layman but if it turns out that the Minnesota 15 were doing things like blocking law enforcement vehicles or throwing ice blocks, that doesn't seem like constitutionally protected speech anymore. Apparently some of them were charged with such offenses. So that might weigh on whether I thought ICE was "cracking down on left-wing social movements".

Generally the evidence seems vastly more narrow.

[–] iAMkenough 1 day ago
> The article gave no evidence that these people hadn't committed any crimes

Are we now doing “guilty until proven innocent?”

> there's no mention of the ~10 million people who entered illegally under Biden. Is it democratic to have open borders?

Where is that figure sourced from? Are the borders still open?

You’re ignoring the bipartisan bill that would have increased border security in 2024, but Republican politicians shot down for political purposes to help Trump in the election. What did that bi-partisan solution get wrong that you would have done differently?

I get the sense this writer believes Immigration Enforcement Officers deporting and tracking legal American citizens is anti-democratic.

[–] irenaeus 1 day ago
There's actually a ton of evidence that they have committed crimes but the article doesn't mention that.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/15-members-direct-action-minn...