Free Speech

Immigration Activists Targeted for Deportation and Harassment

Even supporters of the law should recognize the dangers of using enforcement as punishment.

|

The more power government has, the more weapons that are available for officials to wield against people who rub them the wrong way. That's true when it involves the (thankfully former) governor of New York abusing regulatory powers to cut gun-rights groups off from banks and insurance, and it's also true when immigration officers selectively target activists for arrest and mistreatment in order to silence them and intimidate their allies.

"For years, activist Maru Mora-Villalpando has organized hunger strikes to protest conditions at an immigrant detention center in Washington state," NPR noted in a recent story. "By 2017, she'd gotten the attention of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. One high-ranking ICE officer described her as an 'instigator' in an internal email. Another responded that Mora-Villalpando was a 'well-known local illegal alien,' and suggested that trying to deport her might 'take away some of her 'clout.'"

Targeting immigration enforcement efforts directly against people who protest and organize for changes in immigration law is an overtly politicized use of government power. Even those who like the law just the way it is, or who favor changes directly opposed to those advocated by Mora-Villalpando, should recognize the dangers of using enforcement as punishment. That's especially true since her case is far from isolated.

"Federal immigration officers have long engaged in a pattern of surveillance of—and outright retaliation against—individuals advocating for immigrants across the country," according to a recent report from the University of Washington School of Law Immigration Clinic. "Court filings, internal government records obtained through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and related litigation, and interviews with five immigrants' rights organizations across the country—Organized Communities Against Deportation (OCAD) in Chicago, IL; La Resistencia in Washington State; Grassroots Leadership in Austin, TX; Comunidad Colectiva in Charlotte, NC; and Migrant Justice in Vermont—reveal a sustained campaign of ICE surveillance and repression against advocacy groups and activists."

The report goes on to detail the measures authorities take to identify and penalize activists, including placing them under close observation, harassing them, circulating their photographs, and barring them from facilities. Informants are called upon to identify people associated with activist groups. And, of course, activists are targeted for arrest and deportation.

Targeting can take a more brutal turn, too, according to the report. After a woman identified only as Laura alleged that she'd been sexually assaulted at the T. Don Hutto Detention Center in Texas, "Hutto guards assaulted, threatened, and isolated Laura, denied her medical attention, and attempted to force her to recant her accusations."

Laura's treatment involves clear acts of criminality by the authorities, but most cases revolve around selective enforcement. One such case resulted in the deportation to Argentina of Claudio Rojas, who lived, worked, and raised a family in the United States for years while going through the process to legalize his status. Then, he publicly criticized immigration policy.

"Everything changed suddenly when I was featured in a documentary film," Rojas wrote earlier this year for the Daily Beast. "The Infiltrators premiered at the Sundance Film Festival in January of 2019. Weeks after the film (and my name) was in the national news, I was suddenly deported. I had been in the United States for almost 20 years. To justify the sudden deportation, ICE falsely accused me of 'crimes.' It was clear that the true motivation was to punish me for speaking out."

Questioned in April about such cases of retaliation, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas grandly answered that "retaliation in response to the constitutionally protected right of free speech and, quite frankly, the obligation, the civic obligation, to protest government positions with which one disagrees, that's just unacceptable."

When specifically asked whether Rojas and those like him might be returned to the U.S., Mayorkas vaguely offered to check with DHS's Family Reunification Taskforce, created earlier this year, "about the community of people who might have claims of retaliation and to see if we can look into those as part of our overarching effort."

Being charitable, that's probably about as much as can be expected from an official unfamiliar with specific cases who doesn't want to commit to a course of action on abuses inherited from previous administrations. But it's cold comfort to even relatively prominent figures like Rojas whose case was brought before the head of DHS, and like Maru Mora-Villalpando, who has support from the United Nations, and still live in limbo. The many lesser-known activists targeted because they angered immigration officials by criticizing government conduct have even less hope for respect for their rights by government agents accustomed to punishing people for standing out.

Selective enforcement against people not for being in violation of the law, but for ticking-off government officials by advocating for changes in the law, should frighten even those who pride themselves as hardliners on immigration. After all, the United States isn't short on hot-button policy disagreements that divide supporters of enforcement from advocates of reform. From guns to drugs to sexual expression to free speech itself, Americans are at odds with government and each other on a host of issues. If speaking out against the law is enough to paint targets on our backs, then many people are at risk well beyond the world of immigration reform activists.

"Where federal agencies targeted an individual because they were engaging in protected speech critical of the government, they should restore them to their prior status," the University of Washington immigration clinic report urges the Biden administration with regard to immigration activists. That's excellent advice on any issue—criticizing official policy of any sort shouldn't be grounds for surveillance, arrest, and abuse.

But admonitions that government shouldn't target critics for special attention is also a reminder that law is always dangerous in ways that extend well beyond its intended application. Any opportunity for wielding coercive power will ultimately be used as a weapon by government agents against people they don't like.

NEXT: Brickbat: Don't Let the Sun Go Down on You

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Umm, they are residing illegally in this country. Either enforce the law or change it. Not the governments fault that they stick their necks out.

    1. My apologies, rbike. I wanted to upvote your comment but there is no obvious way to do that. I wondered what options were available under “Flag Comment” so I clicked it to look. Now your comment is labeled “Comment has been flagged for review”.

      I am truly sorry. My intention was to complement you on a logical post.

      1. Hey, don’t worry, I have flagged many a good post with this UI and my phone. I just keep scrolling.

        1. LOL!

          I just accidentally flagged this comment scrolling up

          1. If I scroll one side, I reply to everyone… Flags for the other.

            1. I made over $700 per day using my mobile in part time. I recently got my 5th paycheck of $19632 and all i was doing is to copy and paste work online. this home work makes me able to generate more cash daily easily.REw simple to do work and regular income from this are just superb. Here what i am doing. Try now………

              Click Below Webpage………….. VISIT HERE

            2. Seriously I don’t know why more people haven’t tried this, I work two shifts, 2 hours in the day and 2 in the evening…ERt And i get surly a check of $12600 what’s awesome is I m working from home so I get more time with my kids.

              Try it, you won’t regret it!…….. VISIT HERE

          2. Flag me? No no no, FLAG YOU!!!

      2. Also Don, that only hides the comment from you. The rest of us can still see it and I don’t think anyone at Reason monitors them.

        1. I think they might look if a comment gets some threshold number of flags. No sign that they look if it’s just one or two.

          1. Speaking of free speech this Marine https://www.foxnews.com/us/stuart-scheller-marine-fired-criticizing-military-leaders-resigns
            spoke out on Afghanistan, was relieved of duty and decided to resign with 3 yrs left’ Because he spoke out about what happen to this Marine
            https://thechive.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/i0frn9xw63k71.jpg?attachment_cache_bust=3796124&quality=85&strip=info&w=600
            and 12 others.

            Military Cancel Culture

            To Joe Biden and all of his supporters; This is the price of hate. You may have stopped the mean tweets but FUCK YOU!

    2. I am reminded of a proverb about launching hard objects while residing in a building constructed of transparent silicate.

      When a person publicly declares that they are violating the law, the government has a duty to enforce it. You can’t even just give a plausible deniability excuse for not enforcing it. It is an active violation of their oaths of office to not enforce on these people.

      Additionally, any policy that declares that activists are off-limits for deportation is going to be abused six ways from Sunday, and all of you know it.

      1. That can’t be true Ben. Nobody would claim their acts of theft and violence were actually protests against white supremacy, institutional racism or the exploitative nature of capitalism and certainly no journalists, politicians or police leadership would let them off scott free. Just look at the summer of 2020 for evidence of how silly that is.

        1. It was fiery, but mostly peaceful. I blame global warming and Trump’s spray tan.

    3. She’s trying to change it. And got in trouble for it. So yes, it is the government’s fault.

      1. It’s not the governments fault she is here illegally and outted herself. She should have no say in changing US laws since she doesn’t belong here in the first place.

        1. This. She is free to go back to her own country and protest US policy to her heart’s content. If she wants to come here and do it, she can apply for a visa.

      2. The original sin was being an illegal alien. Deport them all.

    4. Exactly!
      If you have warrants out for not paying traffic tickets do you go out and do a burn out and spin doughnuts in front of a cop? I guess if you do and get arrested you could say you are just being harassed because you are expressing your right to drive the way you want! 🙂

  2. Let’s be clear here. Enforcing immigration law against illegal immigration activists who are illegal immigrants themselves is not an abuse of power. If you smoke weed outside the DEA’s office to protest weed laws, you’ve only got yourself to blame when you end up with drug charges. Advertising in public that you are breaking a specific law should get you arrested for breaking that law. To do otherwise is to further enforce the celebrity/politician carve out to enforcement of laws.

    What would be an abuse of power is if they started enforcing unrelated laws that they wouldn’t have otherwise. So for example if they pressured the locals to do a building inspection of the activist’s home and started writing up code violations. An unrelated law or lever of power being used/enforced as punishment for someone not complying with government official’s wishes is an abuse of power.

    The author’s above arguements would have been much stronger if they had stuck with actual abuses of power (threatening someone in holding), and not tried to equivicate the legitimate non-abusive actions taken by the government with the abuses of power.

    1. “ If you smoke weed outside the DEA’s office to protest weed laws, you’ve only got yourself to blame when you end up with drug charges.”

      The state is completely innocent?

      1. Yes. In the situation I described. We’re a nation of laws. If you advertise that you are breaking a law in front of a government official that is in charge of enforcing said law, in a just system you will be brought up on charges for breaking said law. Having laws that are only enforced when the target is unsympathetic or does not have access to the national news media is how unjust and corrupt systems perpetuate.

        1. Runaway slaves in the old Deep South of the USA willfully disobeyed laws too… They had it coming to them! Obey the State, always! Or else! Else you are corrupt (and law-and-order-corrupting) filth, and DESERVE to be PUNISHED!

          1. What made those people heroes is that they accepted the consequences of their actions… and did it anyway. They knew they were violating the law and would suffer for it if caught.

            Flouting the law and demanding no consequences is soft and abusive. You truly care about your cause? And you think you are suffering unjustly? Then don’t try to get out of the legal consequences of your activism.

          1. “Rules for thee, not the aristocracy”

        2. I amazed that Brian needs you to explain this.

            1. Are you arguing against all deportations, or just deportations of public figures/activists?

              1. I’m arguing that assholes enforcing asshole laws are assholes.

                1. So you are sharing your emotional reaction to the article. Thanks for sharing today, Brian.

                  Having laws that are only enforced when the target is unsympathetic or does not have access to the national news media is how unjust and corrupt systems perpetuate.

                2. Right, so the laws shouldn’t be changed just not enforced because you disagree. Got it king Brian, lord of fools.

                  1. I certainly don’t think a law is moral just because it’s a law.

                    1. If I felt morally compelled to drive over your personal vehicle with heavy construction equipment to protest your bumper sticker, you would support me breaking the law then?

                      Feelings and social justice > inherited societal structure that has mechanisms for change already built in, after all.

                3. But ONLY for Mora-Villalpando, it seems.

                4. The question I was responding to was about drug laws, Not the topic of the article: immigration

        3. Funny thing; one of those laws says that a substance with proven medical uses cannot be listed on schedule one.
          Why then are the top men who keep marijuana on schedule one not in jail?

          1. So you agree with me? Laws need to be enforced even when the one breaking them are politically powerful.

        4. So, the burglar who posts boasting of his haul on Facebook should be excused as well?
          In my town there is a certain sort of vehicle accident where the car is abandoned and nothing reported. The car will turn out to have phony registration stickers and no one will claim it. The driver was undocumented and has the sense to not hang around, the sense those people do not have, they having been advised by college teachers, who famously have none.

          1. “So, the burglar who posts boasting of his haul on Facebook should be excused as well?”

            Well, Antifa tends to stick to Twitter rather than FB, but yeah, I’m pretty sure that’s the working theory these days.

            It used to be that if you blew up a police cruiser, you’d go to jail for your crimes and become a Leftist folk hero. Now that the left controls the levers of power, you can skip the jail part and go straight to hero.

          2. Well for one the burglar is harming other people. Immigrants who are just here to work really aren’t. See the difference?

            1. Does that include ms13? How about the person who lost his business because he could not compete against other businesses who were being run by illegals and only employ illegals (lower pay) or the person who was laid off because their employer was hiring illegals! (lower pay) I guess these people were not being hurt! and don’t come up with the BS they are only doing jobs US citizen or people who went through the system don’t want to do!

        5. “We are a nation of laws”

          We are a nation of individuals. That captures the difference between libertarian and authoritarian.

          Not a big Ayn Rand fan.

          She did say this.

          “There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.”

          It is the essential difference between libertarian and authoritarian. She got that much right.

          I will give another one.

          “The real division is not between conservatives and revolutionaries but between authoritarians and libertarians.”
          ― George Orwell

      2. Yes, this! Also if you convert to being non-Islamic in an Islamic theocracy, and get punished for it, you’ve only got yourself to blame!

        1. 1/10 needs more ranting.

          You’ve been quiet and not yourself lately. Pop another happy pill.

      3. “The state is completely innocent?”

        The only thing worse than a state with draconian laws is a state that arbitrarily applies those draconian laws. Surely you understand why that is a problem, right?

        1. That’s always been my complaint. The only way to end an unjust law is to make sure it is enforced completely. If only SOME people are annoyed by it, nothing will ever change.

      4. It’s not a question of “innocence” it’s a question of expectations when you live in a “Nation of Laws”. Illocust was careful to also say this in his comment:

        Advertising in public that you are breaking a specific law should get you arrested for breaking that law. To do otherwise is to further enforce the celebrity/politician carve out to enforcement of laws.

        If we continue to deport quiet illegal aliens, but create a buffer zone around Mora-Villalpando, then that’s all the government is doing. It’s making a “show of compassion” and respecting free speech, but only for Mora-Villalpando, while its machine grinds through the rest of the illegal immigrants.

    2. Indeed, this used to be what people would call “Civil Disobedience”. You actually publicly break the law to demonstrate how unfair it is. And you cannot demonstrate its unfairness UNLESS you are punished for it.

      1. And in case people think I’m being flippant, I am being serious. Civil Rights activists in the south deliberately held sit ins in segregated businesses BECAUSE they wanted the country to see people being dragged out of a restaurant in cuffs. It was these pictures- showing an uncaring, brutal state trooper hauling out (and sometimes beating) a non-violent activist- that helped galvanize the country against segregation.

        If an activist brazenly disregards the law, and pays no price for it, there is ZERO incentive to change it. The mushy middle of the country will say, “Sure it is illegal, but no one is enforcing the law anyways.”

        In many ways this is why we CONTINUE to fight about immigration. The democrats, rather than putting pen to paper and FIXING it the last 2 times they’ve held the full power of government, would rather keep immigrants as perpetual thralls. Were they to actually do anything to actually normalize immigration in the country, they’d lose a valuable set of activists.

        1. I have to agree. Part of the reason that civil rights activists violated the laws so flagrantly and publicly was because they didn’t want the police to say “just move along” like would normally happen. They didn’t want discretion. They wanted the police to feel stupid for arresting people for the “crime” of sitting in a restaurant or on a bus, they wanted the courts to feel ridiculous for punishing them, and they wanted Congress to feel like a bunch of morons for passing the law.

          That’s the point.

          While I might not agree with the cause of the “Dreamers”, them walking to the border in graduation attire to be denied entry at least showed they understood the basics of protesting theory. This article doesn’t even show that.

        2. “The democrats, rather than putting pen to paper and FIXING it the last 2 times they’ve held the full power of government, would rather keep immigrants as perpetual thralls. Were they to actually do anything to actually normalize immigration in the country, they’d lose a valuable set of activists.

          Actually they would lose campaign contributions. Yes, our immigration laws are screwed up and need to be changed, but, “legal immigration” is a cash cow for lawyers who specialize in it. They are also huge donors to the DNC.

          1. Never waste a good crisis–or fix one.

    3. “Enforcing immigration law against illegal immigration activists who are illegal immigrants themselves is not an abuse of power.”

      I disagree:

      Illegal immigrants like Claudio Rojas, who have “lived, worked, and raised a family in the United States for years while going through the process to legalize his status,” seem to easily meet the status of “people” under the Constitution, according the SCOTUS, and therefor have First Amendment rights.* Targeting them because they speak out is a violation of those rights. You need to charge them with a crime and take them to court.

      *..”‘the people” [494 U.S. 259, 260] refers to a class of persons who are part of a national community or who have otherwise developed sufficient connection with this country to be considered part of that community.”’ Pp. 264-266. (UNITED STATES v. VERDUGO-URQUIDEZ (Wiki)

      1. They are being targeted for enforcement of the law they violated…JFC you people are stupid. By this logic I can murder a man, publicly and loudly proclaim i did so to everyone, especially LE, and that would make investigating the murder an abuse of power to you if they ever came after me.

        1. If he was simply a “person,” as defined in SCOTUS, then his rights are rather more limited, including NOT necessarily having a right to first and second amendment protections. But, his history (twenty years in the US, job, family, and in the process of pursuing citizenship), indicates he is also a member of the class of “people,” which changes how the law needs to respond to him.

          1. But, his history (twenty years in the US, job, family, and in the process of pursuing citizenship), indicates he is also a member of the class of “people,” which changes how the law needs to respond to him.

            He is not a citizen and he does not have a legal right to reside in the US. Therefore, the US can (and should) legally deport him, period.

      2. Illegal immigrants like Claudio Rojas, who have “lived, worked, and raised a family in the United States for years while going through the process to legalize his status,” seem to easily meet the status of “people” under the Constitution, according the SCOTUS, and therefor have First Amendment rights.

        And they are free to exercise their US First Amendment rights from a country where they can legally reside.

        Targeting them because they speak out is a violation of those rights. You need to charge them with a crime and take them to court.

        They are targeted because they have publicly identified themselves as people who have violated immigration law, and nothing more is being done to them then to apply the remedy prescribed by law: deportation.

    4. “What would be an abuse of power is if they started enforcing unrelated laws that they wouldn’t have otherwise.”

      Except in this case it seems like immigration laws *are* ones they wouldn’t be enforcing otherwise

  3. Notice there’s not a lot of Canadians protesting. Perhaps because mexico is a corrupt sh**hole? Maybe protesting in mexico and fixing your own problems?.. Nah. Much easier to crap in the neighbor’s yard. GFY.

  4. “Immigration Activists Targeted for Deportation and Harassment”

    Absolutely unacceptable.

    Maybe Reason.com’s benefactor Charles Koch could use some of the $5,000,000,000 he’s already made during the #BidenBoom to help pay for their legal defense. It would be a wise investment because immigration is great for billionaires like Mr. Koch — foreign-born labor is more cost-effective.

    #OpenTheBordersToHelpBillionaires

  5. https://twitter.com/jackmurphylive/status/1432059912012632073?s=19

    This guy ran the department of education.

    “@arneduncan
    Have you noticed how strikingly similar both the mindsets and actions are between the suicide bombers at Kabul’s airport, and the anti-mask and anti-vax people here?
    They both blow themselves up, inflict harm on those around them, and are convinced they are fighting for freedom.”

    1. Leftists, and their allies, are a virus

    2. I wish I could find the Twitter quote about how, after 20 yrs., the Taliban liberated Afghanistan from a regime that forces people to wear masks, tears down statues, and supports the mutilation of childrens’ genitals.

      1. It’s funny because it’s true

    3. Isn’t Arne Duncan the guy who used his position in the Obama administration to destroy for profit educational organizations, snapping up the leftover pieces, and making millions in the process?

  6. Immigration Activists Targeted for Deportation and Harassment

    So we’re deporting American Citizens? No?

    Seems weird to talk about all the deportations if there is no invasion.

    1. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/americans-gave-up-citizenship-in-record-numbers-in-2020-up-triple-from-2019-reports-tax-specialists-americans-overseas-301222817.html#:~:text=There%20are%20an%20estimated%209,2019%20when%202%2C577%20Americans%20renounced.

      A record 6,705 Americans gave up their citizenship in 2020
      A 260% increase from 2019 when 2,577 Americans gave up their citizenship

      So… If, for whatever reasons (political, symbolic, religious), your next-door neighbor, friend, or relative gave up their USA citizenship, you’d be happy to see them deported? Where shall we deport them to? Also, will you be happy to have other nations deport to HERE, those who renounce citizenship in (??? whatever) their native Stanstanistanistanistanistan? Or is the USA somehow super-SPECIAL in this regard? The USA is a “special needs nation”, in need of special accommodations?

      1. “A record 6,705 Americans gave up their citizenship in 2020”

        My 85 year old great-aunt was born in the US in the 1930s. Just before WW2 the family moved to Scotland and she never lived in the states again. I the seventies because of worries about the IRS wanting to tax her, she gave up her citizenship.

        That’s your 6000. People like that.

        They aren’t worried about being deported because they already have their own countries.

        1. Most of them, yes. The ideologically-motivated renouncers living in the USA are few and far between.

          A bigger point is that not all nations have the exact same laws about who is, and who is not, a citizen. Here in the USA, troglodytes want to give up “born here” and replace it with “have the right kind of parents, that I approve of”. In NAZI Germany, too much Gypsy or Jewish “blood” made you a not-citizen of sorts as well. If you’re born in international waters or airspace, in transit? Born on an embassy? Different laws in different lands… It is not at all “natural” or logical laws!

          At the end of the day there are “stateless” persons, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statelessness#:~:text=12%20million%20(2018%2C%20est.)&text=In%20international%20law%2C%20a%20stateless,never%20crossed%20an%20international%20border. … 12 million or so of them!

          This isn’t a libertarian ideology thing… It is a matter of humanity v/s inhumanity! The USA (among other nations as well) turning Jewish refugees (“Not real Germans” in NAZI eyes) back to be slaughtered in Germany was utterly shameful! The same thing is true today, to a lesser degree, with respect to Latin Americans sent back to hell-holes, especially in Central America… Hell-holes partly created by our endless drug wars.

          1. At the end of the day there are “stateless” persons,

            This is a red herring; the large numbers of illegals coming into the US under Biden are not stateless; almost all of them have perfectly good citizenships and are not politically persecuted. The few that are politically persecuted can apply for asylum.

            It is a matter of humanity v/s inhumanity! The USA (among other nations as well) turning Jewish refugees (“Not real Germans” in NAZI eyes) back to be slaughtered in Germany was utterly shameful! The same thing is true today, to a lesser degree, with respect to Latin Americans sent back to hell-holes, especially in Central America…Hell-holes partly created by our endless drug wars.

            Those countries were economically failing long before the US war on drugs; their economic, political, and social plight isn’t America’s responsibility.

            And if we follow your political ideology, the US will turn into the same kind of hellhole.

        2. In a country of 300 Million, 6,000 a year is a really low number for people leaving and deciding to never come back.

          1. The USA, almost completely alone among nations, taxes the crap out of your FOREIGN earnings while you are abroad! So you get double-taxed… There, and here. Also, if you’re rich, they tax the hell out of you if you renounce your citizenship to get away from all of this. There’s plenty of stuff to be “Googled” out there, about it… I am too lazy to find more, but here’s one:

            https://www.americansabroad.org/taxation/

            (So that’s why people renounce).

            1. Thanks Sqrlsy.
              And that’s a very valid reason, which moves the 6,000 people per year number from not unreasonable to shockingly low.

              1. And also distinctly separate from, but still part of, ‘refugees of shithole regimes’.

            2. The USA, almost completely alone among nations, taxes the crap out of your FOREIGN earnings while you are abroad! So you get double-taxed… There, and here.

              That’s incorrect, since most Americans abroad get credit for taxes paid abroad.

              Also, if you’re rich, they tax the hell out of you if you renounce your citizenship to get away from all of this.

              Again, incorrect. You get taxed on capital gains of your assets, something you would be paying anyway if your remained in the US.

              The reason Americans don’t give up their citizenship is simply because if they do, they can’t stay in the US or reenter the US without a visa, because while immigration law isn’t enforced against millions of South American farm laborers, it is enforced strictly against anybody with skills and/or money.

          2. If it saves just one taxpayer!

      2. Are we deporting American Citizens?

        1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deportation_of_Americans_from_the_United_States#:~:text=Some%20Americans%20have%20been%20placed,detained%20or%20deported%20as%20aliens%22.

          Recent data suggests that in 2010 well over 4,000 U.S. citizens were detained or deported as aliens

          Hey, but it wasn’t you or me, or any of our friends, so it’s OK!!!!

          1. That just raises even more questions!

            Questions like “Who was Vice President in 2010 while this was going on?” and “Do you have posts from 2010 demonstrating your opposition to Joe’s deporting of American citizens?”

          2. Recent data suggests that in 2010 well over 4,000 U.S. citizens were detained or deported as aliens Hey, but it wasn’t you or me, or any of our friends, so it’s OK!!!!

            Millions of citizens are detained by police every year; it’s part of how policing works. If only 4000 are detained for immigration-related reasons, that’s extremely low.

            As an immigrant, I carry my Real ID and/or passport card at all times; that way, I can avoid detention if someone questions me about my citizenship. I don’t have a problem with that, why would I?

      3. So… If, for whatever reasons (political, symbolic, religious), your next-door neighbor, friend, or relative gave up their USA citizenship, you’d be happy to see them deported?

        Yes.

        Where shall we deport them to?

        Any other nation they are a citizen of.

        Also, will you be happy to have other nations deport to HERE, those who renounce citizenship in (??? whatever) their native Stanstanistanistanistanistan?

        If they are US citizens, they should get deported to the US. If they are not US citizens, they get deported to wherever they are citizens of.

  7. Relevant:

    https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/sell-dream-stock-market-influencers-are-netting-millions-pumping-meme-stocks

    Scott Galloway, a marketing professor at NYU, points out why this “strategy” is so effective: “For their entire adult life, the market has gone up. If you say otherwise, you just don’t get it. There is a surrender-to-the-narrative-or-else attitude online, and it’s really frightening, because if you say bitcoin is overvalued, or Tesla is overvalued or whatever popular SPAC is overvalued, these trolls in anonymous accounts come out of the woodwork and start attacking you.”

    1. If you can be swayed on the value of something like bitcoin because of internet trolls, you don’t really understand it.

      1. I’d love to see an objective test for internet troll.

        I’d also love to see the results of that test applied to the people who built, launched, and maintain bitcoin.

        Ideally, if we’d had the test the (several) Mt. Gox theft(s) could’ve been avoided.

        The whole project is, nominally, a deliberate troll of fiat currency.

  8. Vote for fascists, get fascism.
    Well, damn! whodathunkit?

    1. But no mean tweets.

  9. Find Latest FreeJobAlert 2021 Notification, Job information in various sector like SSC, Banking, Railway, Navy, Police, PSC and Get the direct official link for all latest Jobs 2021 immediately in this website
    Goverment Jobs is the right place to get all latest Central Government and State Government Jobs notifications and current vacancy updates. Every Day, Goverment Jobs website is publish only Government Job notifications in this post. Job Seekers, who want Free Govt Job Alert quick and easy, Subscribe to Goverment Jobs today
    For more information regarding government jobs Visit : https://govermentjobs.co.in/free-job-alert-2021/

  10. Meanwhile…

    https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/israel-warns-covid-green-pass-will-expire-if-residents-dont-get-third-jab

    For those who aren’t familiar with the pass (which has been cited as inspiration for a similar system that may be rolled out in the UK), across Israel, a ‘green pass’ is required to access many places others may not, including gyms, restaurants, theaters and cinemas, sports arenas, hotels and cultural events. Additionally, face masks remain mandatory in most of these settings.

    What’s more, those who refuse the third jab will be required to quarantine for a week after returning to Israel from abroad. And even those who receive the third shot will need to quarantine after returning from any country not deemed at low or moderate risk of COVID infection. Booster recipients will be allowed to self-isolate for 24 hours or take a test to prove that they’re not infected with the virus.

  11. This is getting confusing. Which branches of the police state, and which policies, are good these days?

  12. Posting this before it gets censored:

    https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1432330620563300364?s=19

    JUST IN – Corona not likely cause of death in 80 percent of official covid deaths reported in Germany since early July, according to Prof. Dr. Bertram Häussler, head of the independent health research institute IGES in Berlin (WELT)

    [Link]

    1. I do know, and have read from various data scientists and other “experts” (make of that what you will) that we can’t regression test much of our COVID data, if any at all.

      Data point: X person died in Sept of 2020 from (with/adjacent to) COVID.

      Challenge: Prove it.

      Data point: Death certificate says right here…

      Challenge: Not good enough. What was the test you used.

      Data point: A lab test.

      Challenge: Can I see the lab test.

      Data point: *shuffles through papers* yeah, here it is… says ‘positive COVID’.

      Challenge: Ok, can I see the details of the lab test itself, PCR frequency values etc.

      Data point: *looks around nervously* we didn’t keep that.

      1. Rounds begin at 7:00 am. Looking forward to your case presentation.

  13. Celebrities are always in greater danger of the authorities noticing them. You can’t bring attention to yourself without bringing attention to yourself. Martha Stewart probably didn’t deserve to be singled out for insider trading, but that’s what happens when you’re in the news. If you bring attention to yourself by protesting publicly against Homeland Security, you can hardly blame them for noticing you. Snorting coke on TV or bragging about evading taxes on TV will probably get you noticed by the police and the IRS, too. Bank robbers who film themselves and upload to YouTube have no one but themselves to blame for the publicity. They’re not being targeted for public speech. They’re being targeted for robbing a bank.

    1. She wasn’t she went to prison for perjury and lying to investigators. The initial “investigation” was for insider trading but when there was no evidence of that they had to get her on something

      1. It’s doubly ironic as investigators are free to lie their asses off.
        s

    2. Martha deserved what she got. She was very lucky not to receive considerably more jail time. I would not have wept if she had.

  14. Invasion control is sooooooooooooooo important to the national government that ……………. “For years, activist Maru Mora-Villalpand” a well known invader …….

    For Years!
    No wonder State’s want to start enforcing border control.

  15. “retaliation in response to the constitutionally protected right of free speech and, quite frankly, the obligation, the civic obligation, to protest government positions with which one disagrees, that’s just unacceptable.”

    WHOSE constitution? WHOSE government?

    If your Third World shithole is so terrible, how about fulfilling your civic obligation to protest THERE?

    1. If you are from El Salvador or Honduras. You were doing OK growing coffee or finding side work as a carpenter but that collapsed. So the local gang still wants its money every week. If you don’t pay up they kill you. If you leave and come back they kill you and your family.

      That is reality there. Protest against the government? Yeah they kill you.

      1. While sad…and it truly is sad…we are not obligated to help every person stuck in a shit situation.

      2. Echospinner…what happens in Honduras should stay in Honduras.

  16. Immigration Activists Targeted for Deportation and Harassment

    Good. Be sure to throw in a good, solid beating as we’re tossing them out of the door.

  17. Nope send them home if they overstayed their visa or entered the country illegally.

    That is the law.

    1. OBL can explain the Koch angle. Need more peasant labor to keep the elites in caviar.

  18. “figures like Rojas whose case was brought before the head of DHS, and like Maru Mora-Villalpando, who has support from the United Nations, ”

    And this is supposed to be Reason magazine? Virtue-signalling the United Nations?

  19. So it’s libertarians for the law is the law is the law now? Collectivist nonsense. These people are fighting for change.

    “It is true that the virtues which are less esteemed and practiced now–independence, self-reliance, and the willingness to bear risks, the readiness to back one’s own conviction against a majority, and the willingness to voluntary cooperation with one’s neighbors–are essentially those on which the of an individualist society rests. Collectivism has nothing to put in their place, and in so far as it already has destroyed then it has left a void filled by nothing but the demand for obedience and the compulsion of the individual to what is collectively decided to be good.”
    ― Friedrich August von Hayek, The Road to Serfdom

    1. They sure got a change of location.

  20. So… Criminals announcing their criminality and then getting arrested for being public idiots is… wrong?

    The times have changed indeed. System sure sucks, but a whole lot of people seem to manage despite that. I think I’ll hang onto any sympathy vote here.

    1. Pot smokers are criminals in my state. It doesn’t mean that I support the stupid law. Are we to just support any stupid law? How about asset forfeiture or restrictive gun laws? In NYC you are a criminal if you walk into a restaurant without a Covid pass.

      The real criminals are in DC and City Hall. They take our money and restrict our liberty. They start pointless wars. They profit from our hard earned labor.

      1. And they shouldn’t be surprised if they get arrested if they hold a pot smoking party outside the police station.

        If that is the GOAL — make police look stupid for arresting pot smokers — that’s one thing.

      2. If they want to sit in front of the police station and spark up a doobie, you can bet your puckered cheeks I’ll be laughing as I watch the arrest tape.

        I don’t like politicians either, but they don’t have a monopoly on self-righteous stupid.

  21. If this is simply a rule of law argument, the remedy has to be “enforce the law against nonactivist illegal immigrants as well” not “don’t enforce the law against even activists that publicize their lawbreaking”. If you think the law shouldn’t be enforced because of some higher moral duty, okay fine but then you don’t get to use “rule of law” as your argument.

  22. I’m fine with illegal immigrants that have jobs and pay for themselves. But I’m not sure how many of those there really are once you consider all the ways they use up public resources, including schools and hospitals.

    1. Many are paying into dead California voters’ Social Security, does that count?

  23. Every illegal should be deported. It should be particularly easy to find the ones that make lots of noise.

  24. Thanks for your beyond belief blogs stuff. looking for a Accountant Peterborough

  25. Thanks for your beyond belief blogs stuff. looking for a Accountant Cambridge ? Check out this!

  26. Thanks for your beyond belief blogs stuff. looking for a Accountant Cambridgeshire

  27. Promote Abhi which is one of the leading Social media marketing services in India understands this and thus helps you to raise awareness about your products and services through various social platforms.

Please to post comments