Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Tattoos Shouldn’t Be Cause for Deportation

ICE claimed tattoos are evidence of gang activity, grounds for deportation.

Ettore Bechis/FlickrEttore Bechis/FlickrOn May 15, Judge Ricardo Martinez of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington at Seattle ruled in favor of Daniel Ramirez Medina, a Deferred Action for Child Arrivals (DACA) recipient who had been detained by Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) due to a tattoo that ICE claimed showed Ramirez's gang affiliations.

As a DACA recipient, Ramirez was in the country legally. But that didn't stop ICE from detaining him—apparently his paperwork, which he repeatedly showed them, was unacceptable to them because he wasn't "born in this country"—and putting him in a Tacoma, Washington, detention facility in February 2017 while he awaited deportation proceedings. Generally speaking, when the government wants to rescind DACA status, the individual affected is given an opportunity to appeal and contest the decision. ICE claimed that Ramirez presented an "egregious public safety concern" due to gang affiliations. The only issue: The evidence of Ramirez's supposed "gang affiliation" looks like it was doctored.

According to the suit Ramirez filed, ICE agents repeatedly questioned him, asking if he was in a gang (Ramirez said no). Then, "agents also asked Mr. Ramirez about the tattoo on his forearm (which consisted of the words 'La Paz-BCS' and a nautical star)...La Paz is Mr. Ramirez's birthplace, and 'BCS' stands for Baja California Sur, the region in which La Paz is located." The agents insisted the tattoo was evidence of a gang affiliation, to which Ramirez consistently objected.

As Ramirez was about to be placed in a detention center, ICE agents asked if there were any gangs they should avoid placing Ramirez with, for his safety. Ramirez initially said no, and then "indicated that if he had to be placed with any group, he would prefer 'the Paisas.'" According to his lawyers, Ramirez was using the colloquial term Paisas to mean other Mexicans like himself.

When he got to the detention facility, Ramirez was placed in a gang unit, so he petitioned to be moved to a different area, saying, "I came in and the officers said I have gang affiliation with gangs so I wear an orange uniform. I do not have a criminal history and I'm not affiliated with any gangs." The statement returned to Ramirez, by ICE, had the first seven words erased, wholly distorting the message.

After months of Ramirez's suit percolating through the courts, Judge Martinez ruled in favor of Ramirez and penned a scathing indictment of ICE's "arbitrary and capricious" actions, saying the government had no evidence that Ramirez was gang-affiliated and that they wrongfully deprived him of due process when detaining and attempting to deport him.

Too often, unproven, flimsy gang allegations are used by law enforcement as a sort of catch-all justification for arresting, detaining, or deporting people they find suspicious. Earlier this year, The New Yorker reported that "ICE identifies someone as a gangster if he meets at least two criteria from a long list that includes 'having gang tattoos,' 'frequenting an area notorious for gangs,' and 'wearing gang apparel.' Such nebulous indicators are a recipe for racial profiling, according to immigrant-rights advocates."

A late May report by the Immigrant Legal Resource Center says gang-related classifications are on the rise and that "even the 'mere perception of criminality' can impact immigration status because so many decisions turn on credibility determinations." If an immigrant is held in a detention facility, an alleged gang affiliation can affect the security level at which they're placed, and who they're around. If an immigrant is trying to seek asylum, an alleged gang affiliation could certainly hurt their chances. Plus, law enforcement accusing an immigrant of having gang affiliation could mean the individual ends up in one of the country's notoriously unreliable gang databases, which certainly doesn't do them any favors when it comes to becoming a citizen or permanent legal resident.

As Ramirez's story shows, all kinds of physical characteristics can be broadly construed as gang-affiliated by cops and ICE if they're intent on locking someone up. In this case, a federal judge was able to step in and ensure a decent outcome—but what happens in the many other cases in which the person accused of a gang affiliation has less ability to fight back?

Photo Credit: Ettore Bechis/Flickr

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.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    ICE claimed tattoos are evidence of gang activity, grounds for deportation.

    Soccer moms with tramp stamps and ankle tattoos hardest hit.

  • Hank Phillips||

    Holocaust survivors next hardest-hit.

  • FlameCCT||

    IIRC this is the same tattoo that his father has; not to mention that he was picked up in a raid for his multi-time deported, gang member, felon, father; whom he was helping. DACA recipients are not allowed to have contact, let alone assist, gang members and felons.

  • Paloma||

    HAHAHAHA love it.

  • ImanAzol||

    "ICE identifies someone as a gangster if he meets at least two criteria from a long list that includes 'having gang tattoos,' 'frequenting an area notorious for gangs,' and 'wearing gang apparel.' Such nebulous indicators are a recipe for racial profiling, according to immigrant-rights advocates."

    ~~~

    No, that seems accurate. It fits 97% of police officers.

  • Datrebor||

    Depends on the tattoo itself. I am sure they have known gang tats that they are looking for. If FlameCCt is correct then that is reason enough to deport him and his parents the mom for harboring a felon.

  • Datrebor||

    It depends on the tattoo. I am sure they have gang style tats that they are looking for. If FlameCCT is correct that alone is reason enough to deport him and his father. Also any other family that is helping the father in any way. Deport them all.

  • BambiB||

    As a DACA recipient, Ramirez was in the country legally.

    No. As a DACA recipient, Ramirez was in the country in violation of immigration laws. The application of these laws were temporarily and unconstitutionally suspended by the lawbreaker in chief, Obozo. If the laws were properly applied, Ramirez would have been removed from the Country upon learning of his status as a criminal invader.

  • Brett Bellmore||

    Right. He was NOT legally present.

  • BlondeJustice||

    LOL! That made my day!

  • sarcasmic||

    Tats are a deal breaker for this guy. Ink on ladies is gross.

  • Citizen X||

    -1 Suicide Girls

  • damikesc||

    You cannot minus them enough. Ugly broads all.

  • Citizen X||

    Certainly not all, but to each his own.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Hey, don't argue with damikesc. If he says "all" then I'm sure we can trust that he has taken the time to thoroughly consider each individual woman and is not simply painting a diverse group of hundreds of people with the same broad brush based on a single attribute that not all of them share.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    I dunno man, I think we can safely say that all commenters whose username starts with d and ends with c are total morons.

  • Juice||

    Hear! Hear! and a few more hears!

    And it's such a fad, that it seems like over half of them have one these days. The worst is when they have really nice skin and they just go and ruin it like that. Appreciate what you have, jeez.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Tats are a deal breaker for this guy. Ink on ladies is gross.

    You're gonna be lonely. It seems there are more women with tats than without these days.

  • sarcasmic||

    I know I'm going to be lonely. Who wants anything to do with a recovering alcoholic with a special needs child? Nobody. So it doesn't matter what I think.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Want to hang out sometime?

  • sarcasmic||

    Sure. When is the next time you plan on visiting Maine?

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    No idea. My next trip is to Arizona, but if I wander to the NE again let's hang out. Just like random people on the internet do every day.

  • Citizen X||

    One of you is going to end up killing and partially eating the other one, but damned if i can figure out who's gonna do which.

  • Libertymike||

    Well, the answer is for you to hook up with them when BUCS make his way to Maine.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    If we find out sarcasmic is really Tom Woods, I think we know who is eating whom.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    Where in Maine are you? I go there often.

  • sarcasmic||

    L/A area

  • BlondeJustice||

    Not one tatt on me. I never felt I need to attention-seek by putting permanent designs on my skin. I won't hire people to work with me in my business if they have visible tatts. If they are discreet, and I don't have to look at how some tatts look like, then I don't care.

  • ||

    The accident rules, or whatever they are, apply: What, where, who, when?

  • Citizen X||

    There's no gang bigger than the U.S. government, and you best not be messing around on they turf.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Ross Ulbricht found that out.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    The US government sends me drugs via the mail all the time. They even have a website to reorder.

    The War on Drugs has been taking victims for too long.

  • Libertymike||

    What possible argument can be made in behalf of ICE in this case?

    Support for ICE's actions like this constitutes the very elitism and shrillness about which Ken posted this morning.

    The elitism? That the state knows what is best, not you. That the state can continue to take the fruits of those not in the crony-capitalist / government / MIC / national security / national surveillance complex because "safety" and "MS 13" and "rule of law" and such.

    Look, I do not want to be inundated by hordes of third world low IQ, high time preference people. That, however, does not mean I am willing to sacrifice my liberty, my property, or that even of people like Tony or that miserable misanthrope, Sparky, in order to achieve the objective.

    The solutions. END THE FUCKING WARFARE / WELFARE STATE.

    No free dinero, no more Pedro.

    No bienestar, no Benito.

    Should not the Trump supporters give some thought to better solutions? Should not the Trump supporters be bothered by the spectacular lack of imagination in trying to solve the problem?

  • sarcasmic||

    No free dinero, no more Pedro.

    I thought Pedro was stealing jobs from good Americans. Oh yeah, he simultaneously steals jobs, contributes nothing to society, leaches off welfare, and goes to prison. Magical beings, these illegal aliens.

  • Citizen X||

    That's the kind of flexibility you just can't find anymore among native-born Americans.

  • Libertymike||

    Let's face it - you are right: too many gringos are lazy leeches themselves.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Isn't helping that the government heavily subsidizes and enables unsustainable lifestyles.

  • sarcasmic||

    I don't know about you, but where I live there isn't a business without a help wanted sign.

    Nobody wants a job because then they'll lose their free rent, free food, free medical, free drugs, free cable, free internet, free phone...

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    It's a part of the subsidization of certain lifestyles.

    That gap in benefits is huge. I had a friend who got a job, and she had to make a very hard decision. The amount of benefits she would lose by taking the job, eclipsed the income and benefits from the job she was taking. Ultimately, she really wanted to work and took the job. But it's a big jump, particularly because if she loses her job she does not easily get her benefits back.

    The system is made to near explicitly discourage people from bettering themselves.

  • sarcasmic||

    The people who give out the benefits want people to be dependent upon them. That gives them power. They control their lives. "Do this or I'll take away your benefits." Total power.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    It's bullshit.

    For several reasons I believe in just removing all federal transfer payments, but that's very unlikely to happen any time soon. So the least I could hope for is a system that doesn't actively keep poor people in their fucking place.

  • Just Say'n||

    It's the same thing with people who want to impose purchasing restrictions on food stamps. It accomplishes nothing other than imposing the will of others on the poor. Why not just give them a cash payment if we're going to already give out food stamps?

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    I agree. That get rid of the bureaucrats and simplify the system. If we're going to have it, at least just make it more open-market by allowing people to just do what they want with it.

    The only problem is, once someone does take their money and pisses it away at a Casino or something and is broke again, you'd get a ton more people saying "Oh we can't just let them starve!" thereby denying them the consequence of their actions.

  • Just Say'n||

    That's what private charity exists for. At the very least if such a system were ever implemented then we will know conclusively who actually wants to empower individuals and reduce the size of the state and who is just cosplaying.

  • BYODB||

    RE: Welfare Cliff. It's a very real problem no matter what you're preferred solution is.

  • Libertymike||

    sarc - my office manager's sister, a Maine resident, lives that lifestyle. She does have good weed, though.

  • Citizen X||

    Does she get her weed from D-Money, Smoothie, or Shifty?

  • Zeb||

    And, more importantly, was she impregnated by any of those dudes?

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    I bet I could use all those in a sentence. Let's see.....
    "Are you gonna give me D-Money for the Smoothie before the end of my Shifty?"

  • BlondeJustice||

    LOL!

  • Paloma||

    Free medical is a BIG one because healthcare is insanely expensive, and thanks to Obama care, so is health insurance. Why the hell work for $500 a week when your insurance premium will be $800 a month?

  • NashTiger||

    What possible case?

    I don't think we need admit anyone with Organized Crime affiliated tats - whether they are Meso-American, Russian, Japanese Yakuza, Calabrese 'Ndrangheta, or ISIS related tats (if such a thing were allowed by fundamentalist Islam). I think most people would have been against admitting Waffen SS covered with Nazi Tats back in the 40s.

    It's common fcvking sense

  • ImanAzol||

    Cool. Except he had none of those.

    But you accurately describe over half the cops in the country, and I'm cool with deporting them.

  • NashTiger||

    link? I've never seen a cop with Yakuza tats

  • BYODB||


    The solutions. END THE FUCKING WARFARE / WELFARE STATE


    Regardless of anything else you may or may not write, I agree with this. It's also true that the labor regulations in the United States serve to artificially inflate the citizens wages at the expense of illegal immigrants, but of course Americans appear to be so stupid that we collectively don't notice that we can't have our cake and eat it too.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Shit, a lot of the rules inflate the wages of citizens who have jobs at the expense of citizens who don't have jobs and experience yet.

    But, I guess fuck entry level black people who need a job to slowly improve their life.

  • BYODB||

    Basically, yes. To advocate for unlimited immigration in the U.S. one would necessarily need to get rid of about a centuries worth of law.

    My whole position is since that's basically impossible, so is unlimited immigration. People apparently don't like realists, I suppose.

  • Just Say'n||

    The ancap position is the only legitimate position that opposes borders while also ensuring a reduction in the state. You can't go half ancap and expect the same results

  • Citizen X||

    You can't go half ancap and expect the same results

    So much for the Libertarian Party, then.

  • BYODB||

    Not that I usually disagree with you or anything Citizen, but yeah I think you summed that up nicely.

    Anarchy of any stripe is a transition state between other, more stable, forms of governance. If the AnCap's got their way nirvana would last about five minutes in my view.

  • Libertymike||

    A few weeks ago, maybe a month ago now, BYODB and yours truly had a good exchange regarding the artificial inflation of wages courtesy of labor regulations.

    Just five minutes ago, I was chatting with a client about the very same issue. I don't think she would like me as much if she read some of my posts, however. She thinks Robert DeNiro's language is permissible and she likened it to Big Papi's "this is our fucking city" - spoken at Fenway Park, five days after the marathon bombing.

  • Citizen X||

    Entry Level Black People would be an awesome name for a funk band.

  • Libertymike||

    They, of course, would feature their remedial riffs.

  • Paloma||

    Biggest factor affecting black men who need jobs is a criminal record that follows them forever. War on Drugs helped bring that about as well.

  • BlondeJustice||

    Here's BS of illegals taking lower wages. I had 2 clients tell me that they would prefer to pay their illegal, doing the same job I did, making $12.00 an hour. I asked for $13.00 as I paid self employment taxes & full FICA, SS, & Medicare taxes.

    I've listened to illegals brag they made 500 to 800 a week, under the table! That was not a surprise to me because I have heard others talking about how they are being paid under the table too. Some had anchor babies, so they got food stamps and when you work under the table, your income is not included, so you get the max amount. These illegals didn't know I knew Spanish, so they just bragged away right in front of me.

    I have been hit and run 4 times by illegals, and 3 took off but the last one was caught. Driving without a license and he is charged for the accident. Guess who didn't have any insurance? Our local newspaper actually had a story about the new law here in AZ, where employers are not allowed to hire illegals. So this illegal said he lost his $15.00 an hour bricklaying job because of the new law. The paper was trying to get us feel sorry for him. At the end of the story, we find that there was a happy ending for him, as he found another employer, willing to cheat the system, by hiring him for the exact same amount of money, and I'm guessing, as a bricklayer. Needless to say, many of the jobs are higher paying ones and while we pay our taxes, illegals don't feel the need to do that.

  • FlameCCT||

    IIRC he was picked up in a raid for his multi-time deported, gang member father; whom he was assisting in violation of his DACA status. Not to mention the tattoo is similar to the one used by his father's gang affiliation.

  • Datrebor||

    That person is on DACA and the D is Deferred its not amnesty. He has no more right to live here as any other illegal and helping the father who is a felon after being deported several times should be enough to deport them all. I say take away any and all benefits to any illegals. And that includes any child born here by an illegal that just invaded to have that child. No money, no jobs, no free anything and they will go home by themselves. It won't cost us that much to get it done. Also take any property own by illegals to pay to deport them. If the government can take property because they think you acquired it with drug money then they can take illegal's property too.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Most gang bangers have tattoos but not all brown people have tattoos.

    All illegal immigrants are illegal though.

  • Cathy L||

    Are you working on your Logic 101 homework or something?

  • Cy||

    No. He just realizes that if you label someone some bullshit moniker like 'dreamer' it doesn't make them super special immune to local, state and federal laws. You see, some people believe that it doesn't matter what color your skin is or who your daddy is, the law matters. If you want to change the law, we have ways of doing that.

    I realize how much you like to dance in the unicorn fantasy land of liberal dictatorship, where you can pick who has to obey the law on some victimy of the most victim scale, but some of us actually live in reality.

  • Cathy L||

    That's quite the exegesis.

  • Just Say'n||

    I always felt sorry for you when you said stupid things in your debate with Borowski. Now you say stupid things here and I still feel sorry for you

  • Cy||

    After spending enough time as an altar boy, I've lost my patience for religion and dogma, especially the proggie victim religion.

  • Libertymike||

    After the supper was ended,
    HE took the chalice,
    and, once more, giving thanks,
    HE gave it to HIS disciples, saying

    TAKE THIS, ALL OF YOU, AND DRINK FROM IT

    Do you know the rest?

    What did father do with you in the sacristy, after Mass?

  • sarcasmic||

    Funny how so many libertarians who oppose unjust laws suddenly become fervent the-law-is-the-law zealots when it comes to immigration.

    Principals, not principles.

  • Just Say'n||

    For reference, legal immigrants can be denied a visa for tattoos that associate them with criminal gangs. But, open borders people don't care about legal immigrants. Just the ones from the southern border who won't follow the process

  • Cy||

    IT'S FOR THE CHILDREN! NO BORDERS = LIBERTARIAN UTOPIA!

  • sarcasmic||

    Keep flogging that open borders straw man.

  • Just Say'n||

    This is insanity.

    "Don't believe what's written here. Just believe what I say."

    How do they not support open borders?

  • sarcasmic||

    Criticism of current policy does not equate to support of open borders.

  • Just Say'n||

    How about answering why it makes sense to restrict legal immigrants from entering the country based upon tattoo markings, but it is not OK to treat illegal immigrants residing in the country differently

  • Cy||

    "Keep flogging that open borders straw man."

    We already have very liberal immigrant/asylum laws. There are people on here arguing for amnesty for all of the illegals, or at least some the ones they think are ok, and even more liberal laws. So, what happens if we give everyone amnesty, you know, the 'victims,' and then make the laws even less stringent and THEN we still have to enforce them and we still have illegal immigrants.

    Then what? Where's the line in the sand?

    No. There's nothing strawman about it. There are constantly calls for amnesty and loosening of already lax regulations and enforcement. The goal is clear. if all it takes is someone crying into a camera to get rid of a law and the enforcement of the law, OPEN BORDERS is where that leads.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    My call is for allowing labor to flow freely, and allowing for free association with foreigners without having to get permission from Daddy.

  • Just Say'n||

    Couching immigration in "free association" is quite the stretch, since most people immigrating here are not doing so with a job already being offered to them or someone within the country inviting them in.

  • Just Say'n||

    And nothing in this article has to do with "free association" or immigration in general. It is about affording special privileges to illegal immigrants that are not afforded to legal immigrants

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    What? As long as there is at least one job posting somewhere in the country, a job is being offered.

  • TuIpa||

    "What? As long as there is at least one job posting somewhere in the country, a job is being offered."

    Holy shit you're an idiot.

  • Zeb||

    But, open borders people don't care about legal immigrants.

    Hey, now! I care about everyone.

  • Citizen X||

    It's true, Zeb does care about everyone. That's why he drinks IPAs - he's leaving all the beers that actually taste good for other people to drink.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Opposing unjust laws and getting them repealed instead of ignoring them is integral to Rule of Law.

  • sarcasmic||

    Getting them repealed? Good luck with that. When was the last time an unjust law was repealed? Seriously.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Net Neutrality was just repealed.

    You want another example?

  • sarcasmic||

    Net neutrality wasn't law. It was executive fiat.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Law is a broad term. Judges make 'law' too.

    Wasn't it you talking about the difference between legislation and law?

  • sarcasmic||

    Wasn't it you talking about the difference between legislation and law?

    Yes I was. This is a quote from Bastiat's The Law. Translated from French.

    Regardless it looks like you are intent on ignoring the principle of what he said. Whatever.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    I would actually like an example of a law, instead of unelected bureaucrats changing regulations.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    BestUsedCarSales|6.19.18 @ 2:55PM|#
    I would actually like an example of a law, instead of unelected bureaucrats changing regulations.


    Because you asked so nicely.

    The 21st Amendment repealed a law.

  • sarcasmic||

    The 21st Amendment repealed a law.

    What about something in living memory?

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    If your only example is a constitutional amendment requiring 2/3rds of the states to convene and agree to it, then that kind of proves the point about how calcified laws are.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    BUCS: "If your only example is a constitutional amendment requiring 2/3rds of the states to convene and agree to it, then that kind of proves the point about how calcified laws are."

    You sure putting a bunch of conditions on this when its spelled G-o-o-g-l-e.

    Good luck. I provided a repealed law. Actually two of them since EOs are considered law to, well, the legal community.

  • Paloma||

    Colorado legalized marijuana. And also the first state to liberalize its abortion laws in 1967, five years before Roe v Wade.

  • sarcasmic||

    Just laws is integral to Rule of Law.

    Or as Bastiat said "When law and morality contradict each other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense or losing his respect for the law."

    I have not lost my moral sense.

  • Just Say'n||

    Strange how Bastiat uses the term "citizen"

  • sarcasmic||

    Strange how Bastiat uses the term "citizen"

    Yeah, that negates the principle of what he said.

  • Zeb||

    I think the same applies to non-citizens in the current context as well.

    Seems to me that Bastiat uses "citizen" in contrast to "subject" not in contrast to "non-citizen".

  • loveconstitution1789||

    "Just laws is integral to Rule of Law."

    I agree with you on that one. Hence the checks and balances to prevent unjust laws from being passed. If they are, they can still be repealed.

    Ignoring unjust laws just allows those laws to sit on the books and be used when you least expect it.

    I live in a town that requires ownership for every resident. The residents without guns violate the law every day.

  • Zeb||

    We did rule of law yesterday, so I won't get into that again.

    But some unjust laws are awfully persistent. Drug prohibition is a particularly strong example. People are going to ignore laws like that.

    Sarcasmic is right that to even approach something like rule of law, your laws need to be just. Otherwise you have lots of ordinary, decent scofflaws.

  • BYODB||


    Sarcasmic is right that to even approach something like rule of law, your laws need to be just. Otherwise you have lots of ordinary, decent scofflaws.


    True, the law would also need to be knowable and it's clear that even the men elected to make law have no idea what laws are already on the books.

  • DarrenM||

    So, you are then claiming this is an unjust law that should be opposed? Exactly which law are you referring to?

  • Devastator||

    Not all issues are the same. I think we should triple or quadruple the number of legal immigrants allowed to come in and lighten up on citizenship and make it a 5 year set process. That said, people coming across illegally need to be sent back to their home countries so fast that their heads spin. Also e-verify would be a great addition, with stiff penalties and jail time for employers who knowingly hire illegals. This is not a complicated matter; media just makes it sound complicated.

  • Datrebor||

    That is true and all illegals need to be deported. No person from any country has the "Right" to live here. They can apply to and be granted to live here. That is the correct way, sneaking across the boarder like a criminal is the wrong way and should be sent home to come the correct way.

  • AlmightyJB||

    Not arbitrary enough?

  • sarcasmic||

    As Ramirez's story shows, all kinds of physical characteristics can be broadly construed as gang-affiliated by cops and ICE if they're intent on locking someone up.

    Show me the man, I'll show you the crime.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Show me the narrative. I'll show you the victim.

  • John||

    Tattoos are generally evidence of gang activity. Not all tattoos but some most certainly are. And it is not hard to tell which ones are.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Tattoos for gang members are the story of your gang life.

    All the Californian who are lefties should know that. Their prisons are full of gang bangers loaded down with tattoos.

  • Zeb||

    People do stop being gang members sometimes.

  • FlameCCT||

    True. Although did this guy report his prior gang activity? Not to mention he was picked up in a raid for his multi-deported, gang member father; whom he was assisting in violation of his DACA status.

  • Zeb||

    No idea. For all I know he does deserve to be deported.

  • Devastator||

    Then they should get their MS13 tats turned into something else.

  • Jerryskids||

    I have a Hell's Satans tattoo myself. Well, I drew it on with a Sharpie, but that's PERMANENT ink, jack.

  • Marty Feldman's Eyes||

    Tattoos are generally evidence of gang activity. Not all tattoos but some most certainly are.

    No comment.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    Of course John would claim to be a tattoo expert. Of course. If you have a tattoo, and are not sure whether or not you might be in a gang, John would be happy to tell you.

  • Longtobefree||

    Well, at least they are treated like guns; look scary, get treated scary without regard to laws.

    And references to Baja, California, and (big) Sur on a tattoo clearly indicate he is a surf nazi.
    Out he goes!

  • DarrenM||

    And "Baja" means South, so he's obviously a Confederate sympathizer.

  • Longtobefree||

    Well, yeah, it translates to 'south'. But Confederate sympathizers only speak true English. (true English has a drawl)

  • Hank Phillips||

    Hey! Maybe Internment and Coerced Emigration can swing by and pick up Ted Cruz and Obama, who both claim not to have been born here either. For Ted the tough problem would be finding a country willing to take him...

  • Just Say'n||

    Or maybe we could treat illegal immigrants with the same vetting that we do legal immigrants? Crazy, I know

  • BYODB||


    As a DACA recipient, Ramirez was in the country legally. But that didn't stop ICE from detaining him—apparently his paperwork, which he repeatedly showed them, was unacceptable to them because he wasn't "born in this country"—and putting him in a Tacoma, Washington, detention facility in February 2017 while he awaited deportation proceedings.


    Does deferred action mean no actions will ever be taken? A curious position.

  • BillyG||

    As a DACA recipient, Ramirez was in the country legally.

    I do not think DACA means what you think it means.

  • FlameCCT||

    Isn't this the "Dreamer" that was picked up for assisting (hiding) his illegal, multiple time deported, gang member, father; when the father was picked up in an ICE raid?

    Why wouldn't ICE be concerned since the "Dreamer" has the same gang tattoo as his father?

  • Just Say'n||

    You're a terrible woketarian

  • FlameCCT||

    Harboring a known felon and gang member violates his DACA status.

  • Zeb||

    But he's a loyal son.

  • Tony||

    We still talking about how we must employ the state to destroy the lives of desperate individual human beings for no good reason except perhaps some vague hypothetical harm their mere presence does to the collective?

  • Just Say'n||

    No. Actually in this one Reason is arguing that illegal immigrants should be afforded special protections that are never afforded to legal immigrants. Your typical proggie crap. You'll love it

  • Tony||

    Well, these kinds of rights aren't zero-sum.

  • Longtobefree||

    But some are zero

  • Citizen X||

    This comment would mean more if your problem was with the state destroying lives rather than whose lives are being destroyed. As it is, though, it's just sort of sadly un-self-aware.

  • Tony||

    Unlike libertarians who think the only legitimate function of government is to shoot people or put them in cages, I actually support less state violence than the status quo.

  • Citizen X||

    Everything after "Unlike libertarians" is a lie.

  • Tony||

    It's one of those truths that hurt.

  • Citizen X||

    It's funny that you think that, but nah.

  • ||

    This comment would mean more if your problem was with the state destroying lives rather than whose lives are being destroyed.

    Exactly. The government has been doing this through foreign war, domestic drug war, drone strikes, and even this immigration policy since forever. The idea that this is exceedingly new or different is a big 'because reasons' shit show. The bigger issue that a lot of open borders people are overlooking is that the policies the administration is following are Obama-era decisions and if the administration can overturn them with the snap of it's fingers, even if it does so, is still a problem. Seems like 2-3 months or even 3-4 weeks ago plenty of libertarians understood the precariousness or broader ramifications of this issue but not now.

  • Devastator||

    It does a real harm. Illegals siphon money out of the education system, medical system, and social net system. Legal immigrants who went through the right channels are the ones who should be here.

  • Harvard||

    Tattoos are relevant. They always men something, always.

    Unless you're a sailor.

    Sailors get tattoos so Marines will have something to read during sex

  • Zeb||

    I actually made a special point of only having tattoos that mean nothing.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    Such as your tramp stamp that says "Are you hoppy?"

  • Zeb||

    I would never be so gauche as to have a tattoo with words.

  • Zeb||

    It's just a picture of some hops.

  • BYODB||

    It's a little bittersweet, but a close friend of mine who just died last week had a tattoo of a bunch of grapes. The reason why he got it? It was free.

    So, I think it really depends.

  • EscherEnigma||

    That's funny! You think Marines can read!

  • Harvard||

    I resemble that remark.

  • Mark22||

    Sailors get tattoos [on their back] so Marines will have something to read during sex

    FTFY :-)

  • VinniUSMC||

    100% true.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    Earlier this year, The New Yorker reported that "ICE identifies someone as a gangster if he meets at least two criteria from a long list that includes 'having gang tattoos,'

    If they really want to get progressives to support this, just point out that Russian mobsters are known for having gang tattoos, since anything Russian seems to send them into a frenzy.

  • Chris Cat||

    Not that information should affect anyone's judgement (!!) but I spend most of my time in Central America where tattoos are, in fact, generally considered a mark of being a marero (gang member). Police, for example, cannot have any tattoos. Hipsters in the cities have started sporting some non-marero tattoos, but I'm sure they are careful to conceal them out in the country where suspected gang members are often found in an isolated place cut into small cubes.

    Free speech is great, but if your speech boils down to "I am probably a gang member" ICE members should give Mom her kid back and focus on you. It is really a dumb fashion statement for non-gang members to sport tattoos down here, even more so if they expect to be welcomed in the States.

  • Mark22||

    Tattoos Shouldn't Be Cause for Deportation

    Good thing then that grounds for deportation is the fact that he is in the country without a valid visa or residency permit.

  • The gouch||

    Depends on the tattoo,,, there juddddgggie..

  • 1st American||

    I was almost put into a crime database when I was a kid. My family had moved to Compton, CA. (a low income area infested with crime) when I was 11 years old. One day I walked to the neighborhood store that was a block away. I bought a soda and some potato chips. On my walk back home, a black car with black tinted windows stopped me. Officers jumped out of the car and started asking me what gang I was from. I didn't understand what they meant. I thought a gang was a job or something like that. I told them I was 11 years old and I lived across the street. That's when they took out a polaroid camera and said that they were going to take a picture of me. I told them No. If they wanted a picture of me they would have to get my parents permission. We argued for a little and they became frustrated because I told them that I lived literally one block away and if they were the "real police" they would talk to my parents. Eventually they let me go and I told my mom what happened. It wasn't until years later that I realized it was a police anti-gang unit. They would have registered me, an 11 year old, as a gang member for the gang that lived in my neighborhood if I had let them take my picture.

  • DRM||

    As a DACA recipient, Ramirez was in the country legally.


    Wrong. By definition, in fact. If you are legally present in the country, there's no enforcement action to defer, therefore you cannot receive deferred action for your childhood arrival.

  • Devastator||

    You're the one who is wrong.

  • buybuydandavis||

    "As a DACA recipient, Ramirez was in the country legally. "

    DACA was totally illegal executive authoritarianism, which is now being upheld by totally illegal judicial authoritarianism.

    He's an illegal alien.

    Out! Out! Out!

  • Devastator||

    Wrong. DACA was legit as long as Obama's EO stood. Which wasn't very long. Now congress needs to put on their big girl panties and fucking pass some immigration reform that makes sense.

  • ColoradoKook||

    "As a DACA recipient, Ramirez was in the country legally. But that didn't stop ICE from detaining him."

    Wut?

  • Tionico||

    It is apparent that THIS guy's tats were not gang related, and it does also seem likely that SOME ICE agents get carried away or abuse the "gang tattoo" issue.

    But that does not mean that, in general ,gang tattoos are not good cause for seriously considering deportation. The activites of the main gans and harm they perpetrate upon their neighbours are well known, and not easily deniable.

    Thus your headline is misleading.... gang tattoos CAN be grounds for deportation. WHY would anyone NOT affiliated with gangs even get a gang-related tat?

    A better head would have been someting like ICE agents mis-read tattoo, push for deportation on false assumption

  • vek||

    Don't go talking common sense and using rational thought processes dude... It ruins the feelz the Reason writers are trying to bring out in their readers.

    If other posters have been correct it sounds like this guy had extenuating circumstances that made it almost reasonable for them to make the mistake too... Namely that his father is a known gang member, felon, and that he was illegally harboring him. Sounds to me like they didn't even need the tat to boot his ass out of the country, since harboring criminals is a crime in and of itself.

  • Devastator||

    I agree, no one with any sense would get an MS13 tattoo because if they catch you they cut your head off and use it for soccer. So if you get an tatted up with MS13 shit, you should probably get sent back to whatever shit hole country came from. But if it's just a bunch of butterfly tattoos, I don't think ICE agents should be freaking out.

  • bertwest||

    Tattoo - decoration or mutilation? Healthy or unhealthy? Attractive or just plain ugly?
    As one can tell, I've never been a fan of tattoos - not on myself, and not on others. I see it is gained widely in popularity lately - being not just for sailors, Maoris, or societal outcasts (certainly not to cast sailors and Maoris in the societal outcast category, it's just that these three categories used to entirely comprise nearly 100% or the tattoo bearers).
    Fortunately we have technology that will remove many tattoos, so if folks in mainstream population should change their mind, well: they can. But, the removal process is expensive, and requires a lot of time, and multiple sessions.
    Think before you ink.

  • Devastator||

    Eh, if you're covered with MS13 tattoos you're probably not here to mow my lawn or go to medical school.

  • AD-RtR/OS!||

    If those tats "say" that you're a member of a Terrorist Organization (how else would you describe MS-13), then:
    YES, you should be deported with prejudice. After all, if you cross MS-13, you're the recipient of Extreme Prejudice.

  • sxh14264||

    Tattoos are a sign of too much money and too much time an poor decision making. they are a red flag and should be paid attention to. JUst like wearing hats backwards, wife-beater t-shirts and flying in private jets while preaching global warming. its the little things.

  • swampwiz||

    Good. I think there is a link as well between tattoos & gangs.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online