anti_dan

anti_dan 4hr ago · Edited 4hr ago

The judge wanted the case off his call permanently. That is the most likely reason for this attitude.

*Edit

Here is how I imagine the thought process of a tougher on crime in my jurisdiction going:

Damn it, another dumbass not coming to court.
Oh counsel with another lame ass excuse is it? OOO WAIT a decent excuse this time. ICE CUSTODY! I havent had one for years!
Crap. The state is right, this is actually the defendant's fault. I might have to issue a warrant.
AHA! I can just order them to ask ICE to release him to me! Then I can be rid of this and go to my luncheon on time for once!
Oh crap, no one actually has power over ICE to make that happen.
Now I have to make the hard decision between issuing the warrant and risking he comes back and NOT issuing the warrant and he commits some crimes without a warrant issued! GAHHHH. I didn't become a judge to make choices, this is my paid retirement!

Context

anti_dan 4hr ago

State and Federal power are concurrent. No one gets to tell the other's LE what to do.

Would it be boneheaded to deport a murderer pre-trial? In most scenarios, yes. Almost every jurisdiction would detain the murderer ONE THEIR OWN DIME IN THEIR OWN FACILITIES, then when the murderer is finally released, they'd notify ICE.

But this is not even closely analogous. This illegal has a pending misdemeanor DV charge. The girlfriend is probably going to ask the prosecution to dismiss the charges soon enough (>50% of these end up this way). Even if she's committed they are in front of this hyper liberal judge who wouldn't imprison a "dreamer" or whatever this fellow is classified is in her mind if she knew ICE was anywhere near his trail. In other words, if ICE doesn't detain him, the most likely outcome is the case is dismissed and he waits out ICE for a while then goes about his illegal immigrant activities until he hits this, or another girlfriend again, repeat ad nauseam.

Context

anti_dan 4hr ago

From a practical perspective, ICE fucked up by attempting to detain the guy before his case was resolved. Typically, when a Mexican national commits a violent crime in the United States and then flees to Mexico, we don't leave it at that; we specifically request that the Mexican government extradite him for prosecution here. If he gets deported this is just the administration facilitating his escape. It may not be what he wants, personally, but even for minor crimes, the normal course of business for a criminal defendant in custody awaiting deportation is for the attorneys to request he be released from ICE custody pending the resolution of the case. This is true even for minor offenses like drunk driving, where the defendant is typically out on bail.

This isn't how this usually works. ICE will go through the rigamarole of bringing someone back for some very serious felonies like murder and other Class X (or A, or 1 depending on what state we are talking about) violent felonies. They aren't bringing someone back for a DV unless someone was at least seriously permanently disfigured. In this specific case the case number is 2025CM000814. Although I am not a Wisconsin criminal attorney, I have >90% confidence that stands for "Criminal Misdemeanor" as it does in dozens of jurisdictions I am more familiar with.

In fact, the bail issue is why ICE probably detained him instead of letting the case go to pendency. If he was a murderer, ICE could be fairly confident Wisconsin's courts and law enforcement would detain him, or put him on EM+home confinement or something similar. Instead, his paltry DV charge means he will be walking around Wisconsin for months, if not years only for the victim to probably recant and/or for him to be sentenced to something like 12 months of court supervision. All that time he will have freedom to flee from ICE. ICE also simply doesn't have the space and manpower to detain him themselves and bring him to all his court appearances. Of course defendant's attorneys request that ICE let the case be resolved prior to detention. 1, that is how they get paid, and 2, its ultimately a lot better for their client, PARTICULARLY with misdemeanors. One of the worst things for an illegal alien is to miss court because you got deported because then the next time you get a traffic ticket (and lets be honest you will, that's probably how you got caught in the first place for whatever case you are in court for) there will be a warrant for your arrest. Then you get sent back to that courtroom and ICE can find you all over again. If you clear up the DUI, then get deported, you can sneak right back in and local law enforcement won't run you through the list of deported persons, while the would have run you through the list of nationwide warrants.

So even if this guy is out on bail on domestic battery charges, deporting him to Mexico makes his case impossible to prosecute, and even if ICE is willing to allow him to return for court appearances, it's impossible for the court to monitor his compliance with bail conditions, and he has little incentive to return to the US for criminal prosecution. The ideal situation, from a criminal justice perspective, is to allow him to stay in Wisconsin until his case is either dismissed or his sentence complete, and then begin deportation proceedings. By deporting him now, you only get half a loaf.

There really is no loaf for criminal justice in these charges. He's certain to get minimal to no punishment. The only purpose not deporting him serves is to enable his escape. And again, his failure to appear is kind of a hidden benefit because a more reasonable judge (obviously this one would not) would put out a warrant for his arrest and if he ever came back he'd be right back in that courtroom.

Context

anti_dan 5hr ago

Has the President ALWAYS had the authority to do this under the AEA, and Trump was just the first one to receive an electoral mandate to use this authority...

I find the AEA argument to be quite weak in this case. For the TDA members and their supporters. The AEA was passed when John Adams was President and Thomas Jefferson, his main political rival, was Vice-President. If we transported both to 2025 and had someone neutrally describe TDA, with no conclusion language or question begging (i.e. don't use "invading army", "criminal gang" etc to describe them), describing their place of origin, appearance, and actions both would agree on the outcome. It would go something along the lines of, "Sure I guess we can expel them with the AEA, but why not just hang them like we do with the rest of the Indian warbands that do those things?"

So the dilemma is not real a dilemma about the AEA, its a dilemma about whether expulsion or public execution within 48 hours is the more appropriate punishment. Due process is not something appropriate for foreign savages, both would tell you. In criminal courts it is for co-citizens like the British soldiers Adams defended in court, or for uniformed British soldiers eventual President Andrew Jackson would take prisoner during the war of 1812, who would be held pending the outcome of the war, or immediately expelled under the AEA, depending on what was militarily appropriate. Jefferson, in his later years might note that very few Barbary pirates were ever afforded the opportunity to surrender in that war, mostly ships were left to sink or set ablaze with losses frequently being total.

Context

anti_dan 1d ago

Mass transit, which is typically ambiguously defined, is only better at moving people where the system operates in a hub and spoke system.

If everyone goes to a place for work and then goes home, mass transit is awesome if the place for work is all the same.

However, if there is slight divergence, mass transit loses spectacularly on time. It often even loses spectacularly on price when public subsidies are factored in.

Context

anti_dan 1d ago

There is this thing called the Constitution that does ban discrimination against citizens of another US state.

Context

anti_dan 7d ago

Jus Soli was never intended to be enshrined for birth tourism of any kind, and 1865 isn't so long ago that those people couldn't have imagined better boats and people coming in from Mexico temporarily. There is a reason Wong Kim Ark is about the child of legal permanent residents and there is a reason the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 had to be passed to grant Indian's citizenship, and that reason is that the 14th Amendment does not contemplate expansive jus soli as currently defined. Instead, it applies to people borne her who have no other foreign allegiances, and those who have taken substantive steps to submit themselves to US Jurisdiction as subjects of the nation.

And, of course, it goes without saying that in 1865 the idea of a dual citizen would have been considered absurd by all the people involved.

Context

anti_dan 7d ago

They can cite the TRO as persuasive authority when arguing their case charges should be dismissed. Not having read it, I don't have any conclusions as to the coherence of the judges ruling on the TRO.

Context

anti_dan 7d ago

I mean, if we were introducing that "confession" as evidence at a trial, you may have a point. What actually was happening when he was being held was he was in custody pending an investigation. This guys statements were basically the jumping off point for the investigation which eventually revealed he was a US citizen by birth. Its not like the police would have had that information available on a street corner when they were probably having trouble getting enough information on him to even run a proper criminal background check.

Context

anti_dan 7d ago

Not at all. Cops don't just learn facts from the air. They run background checks which take time to run, and are, frankly, difficult to read.

A person who not only doesn't speak English, but doesn't speak a language that a police station is likely to have an available translator for is going to have a long interaction just because a lot of that time is going to be finding a translator

Context

anti_dan 8d ago

Yes, I think that would be amazing. The guy came to the country illegally, and he was also deported illegally, by the government's own repeated admission, given the withholding order forbidding his removal to El Salvador. If the government took steps to only send him to El Salvador after getting the withholding order revoked by due process, that would be a dramatic improvement to the current state of affairs.

Is the number of people who think this way above 100 in the country? The judge who has issued many orders to Trump certainly is not in this camp. That judge intends, once Maryland Man is back in the US, to keep him here forever. As do his lawyers. His wife, maybe, maybe she prefers whatever monetary payment she thinks the judge will order for her. But still she doesn't expect the result you are talking about.

What everyone expects to happen is that, if this person returns to the US, he will never leave the US. Or, if he does, it will be after a decades long legal process where Amy Coney Barret and John Roberts issue multiple rulings where they clearly articulate that they are sick of hearing cases about Mr. Garcia, but also are completely unclear about the remaining portions of their ruling.

Context

anti_dan 8d ago

If you think that prison is cruelty, you are just propagandized. Most people housed in that, or US prisons actually, would historically have already have been executed.

Context

anti_dan 8d ago

Basically every state that I know of has statutory holding periods for crimes that the officer merely has probable cause on, but not enough evidence to charge yet. 48 hrs is very standard for this time period. By way of example, imagine you are drinking in a bar and are hammered, a car driven by another guy who is also drunk off his ass speeds into a red light right in front of you, T-Boning a car and killing all 4 occupants. The driver of this car flees his vehicle and tosses you the keys. You are too drunk to know what is going on and start walking home with them. Police arrest you a few blocks away, you being the drunk guy with the keys.

Of course you are going to be held even though you are innocent. The police dont know you are innocent yet, and you are a very good suspect. This is why most states have a 48 hr charging clock. Some have longer, but few as far as I know. Solving crime takes time. Fleeing the cops when you know you are a suspect does not.

Oddly, in this case, the police UNSOLVED a crime, despite an admission from defendant in 48 hours. That is crazy good police work! Imagine if a pedophile admitted to raping a child in a taped interview and police, on their own accord, went out and grabbed surveillance video from a hospital showing he was not at the rape location. Unheard of.

Context

anti_dan 10d ago

I've found that the main objections to POSIWID is from people who are, to be frank, heavily invested in institutions where POSIWID is a very valid criticism. Typically bureaucracies and government or government-adjacent systems. If you are a person who thinks, at your core, public schools are good POSIWID is going to upset you because it is going to be deployed to (IMO Accurately) claim the purpose of public schools is the enrichment of lazy, over-schooled, adults. If you are a person who likes Givewell and other similar charities you are going to hate POSIWID because, again, what those charities do is keep Africans alive for the purpose of them having children that the charity then has to keep alive, on and on into eternity. They are a self licking ice cream cone and POSIWID makes that clear, if in an offensive way to those that think such charities are doing good.

Context

anti_dan 14d ago

No, but there is asymmetry.

Context

anti_dan 14d ago

Those other things are easily overcome with proper military and police force applied.

Context

anti_dan 14d ago

Its been described many places. Essentially, it is to move to the West and live in densely Muslim communities. Then use it own Democratic processes and civil rights laws against us to demand local Sharia. Expand, seize Peter when available, etc. Eventually a full scale re-enactment of the 8th century, but this time with locally entrenched allies.

Context

anti_dan 15d ago

They will likely soon face South Africa style trade sanctions from Europe. The Islamic world will continue its aggression. American progressives will eventually follow Europe and then it will be one of the smallest countries in the world with no way to import essential goods. If the world was merely neutral, it would be fine. It is already heavily anti-Israel. Once it goes to full boycott it wont matter that a well supplied Israeli army could conquer all of its neighboring countries simultaneously. Because they wont be well supplied, they will be with no steel, petrol, powder, etc. It will be a race to the boats.

Context