This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Why? The text of the statute refers to "any person for whose arrest a warrant or process has been issued under the provisions of any law of the United States". The text seems pretty broad. Any valid federal warrant must be issued under the provisions of a law of the United States right? Or am I missing something?
EDIT: Also, wouldn't 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(3) apply? Does having ICE agents show up and present an administrative warrant count as knowledge or reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law?
The issue is that an administrative warrant doesn't really count as a warrant. The whole point of warrant requirements in most situations is that a neutral party (i.e., a judge) has the opportunity to review the evidence and determine that certain actions are, well, warranted. An administrative warrant is issued by the enforcing agency itself, and as such has certain limitations. Most notably for our purposes, ICE agents with an administrative warrant can't enter a private residence to look for a subject the way normal police executing an actual arrest warrant can. So if you're my roommate and you're hiding from ICE and they show up at the door and I answer I can simply tell them to go fuck themselves and there's nothing they can do about it. Since this is the case, they usually have to resort to ruses like pretending they need a guy to sign for a package or acting like they're local police (without actually pretending to be local police) in order to get the guy to come to the door.
Since it's widely recognized that a judge's courtroom is a private area, upon learning that the agents only had an administrative warrant, she told them they couldn't do anything in her courtroom and would have to arrest him in one of the common areas of the courthouse. And she was accordingly under no obligation to make sure that the guy got into the common areas of the courthouse, anymore than a roommate is under an obligation to allow ICE agents inside.
As for §1324, I'm not going to comment on that since the judge wasn't charged under that statute. It's possible it could apply here, but I don't know.
I don't really think that follows. A federal officer in furtherance of their job cannot be arbitrarily prohibited from entering a State courthouse. This is approaching 'standing in the schoolhouse door' levels of nullification -- after all, a schoolhouse isn't a public space either, it is a private area for students and teachers only. I can't imagine anyone defending 1960s Montgomery officials telling the 101st Airborne they can't step inside.
[ I agree with respect to a private residence and the 4A, but a courthouse gets zero protection from the 4A and the analogy is extremely tenuous. ]
But even accepting this (dubitante, as they say), it would be still be obstruction to use that 'private area' to play a shell game with federal officers.
And finally, on a subjective note, this seems like ICE agents doing the right things due-process wise. Having been downvoted to hell for insisting on due process, I feel honor bound to turn around and say that ICE officers who do follow the procedure are due some deference.
More options
Context Copy link
Dugan was under no obligation to permit ICE in her courtroom but she exceeded passive refusal into affirmative acts of concealment and harboring when she warned Flores-Ruiz and escorted him through the jury door. You don't have to let ICE in, you can't warn your roommate and say "I'll keep them busy while you book it." She should face those as charges in addition to obstruction.
More options
Context Copy link
What Judge Dugan is alleged to have done is basically this, so... seems like she's in the clear.
Kind of surprised a federal judge signed off on her arrest.
An individual home or place of residence (even temporary, like a hotel room) is due special protection from the 4A.
This is not true for a judge in a courtroom, any more than it is for any other employee at their place of work.
More options
Context Copy link
How likely are federal judges to sign off on "contempt of cop" arrests? I would guess "not very," but perhaps that's wrong or the judge happened to be a bad one. Even if we accept that she didn't commit a statutory violation, "you may beat the wrap, but you can't beat the ride," and the Trump administration seems to be embracing "the process is the punishment."
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link