You state above, "The bishops wrote they are 'concerned about the conditions in detention centers and the lack of access to pastoral care,' and 'troubled by threats against the sanctity of houses of worship and the special nature of hospitals and schools.'"
Are these the statements that are "political"? Are they political in the same sense that the Church(es) pronouncements against abortion or divorce are political? Or are they out there witnessing, answering the question of "What would Jesus do?" in this scenario?
I'm curious why you imply that it's not their Christianity that has preachers out there protesting (and getting shot with pepperballs and manhandled by goons) and agitating for access to the imprisoned, and bishops standing up to say that all of this is contrary to their Scriptures, but instead because the funds cut by Elon's DOGE?
"The Trump administration is not completely indiscriminate in its actions. ICE is targeting illegal immigrants, and of that group, mostly those who were subject to detainers or other deportation orders in the past."
This is flat-out incorrect.
ICE wasn't going after immigrants (or people that look like immigrants) in the parking lots of Home Depot because they had paperwork indicating a specific individual would be there. ICE's modus operandi was to round everyone up that *looked* like they might be deportable, and to sort it out afterwards at their processing facility (i.e. find an excuse for the detention). ICE wasn't chasing down contractors working on suburban houses because they had actionable intelligence. ICE (and their pals in the Border Patrol) were casting wide *indiscriminate* dragnets to try and catch as many people as they could to meet their Stephen Miller quotas.
The Catholic statement isn't one that is playing politics over a difference in policy, but a concrete reaction - likely encouraged by their congregations - to protest the harms and evils being carried out in the real world right now. Greg Bovino has taken his circus to Charlotte - take a road trip one of these days and embed yourself with one of the faith-based communities to see how this plays out for yourself, instead of listening to the liars and shitposters running Homeland Security's communications.
A solid post on the administration's recent immigration actions (and the outcomes):
"Most of all, the data shows that all of the Trump administration’s 'we’re arresting the worst of the worst' isn’t reality at all. Of 614 people included in a recent court order, just 16 of them — roughly two percent — had a meaningful existing criminal record. Those 16 — just sixteen! — included five with domestic battery charges, two drunken driving records, one narcotics convictions, and five who faced other battery charges, two of which involved guns, and one person who is said to have a criminal history in some country overseas. Just one was deemed a 'national security risk' and 'no one had any convictions for murder or rape,' the Chicago Tribune reported. The local police in a city like Chicago or D.C. surely arrest more serious criminals in run-of-the-mill encounters across a single weekend than CBP and ICE managed to round up in weeks."
Matters not so long as they are deportable. Citizens go to prison for crimes that hurt no one. Al Capone was imprisoned for tax evasion. That particular offense probably cost USA taxpayers less than the cost of a few dozen illegals turned loose on society. A relative of mine spent several years in prison for infractions involving non-taxpaid alcoholic beverages and a couple of pounds of marijuana. I would say the maximum damage to the public was no more than $1000 - far less than one illegal dependent in the school system for a few months. I say the prison terms were more than justified just as is deportation of unvetted illegals. We do not know what other crimes they be perpetrating.
Yeah, but that doesn't give the gov't license to violate the US Constitution (1st, 4th, 5th, 8th, and 14th amendments, in particular) which is SUPREME over immigration and other laws AND THE ENFORCEMENT OF THOSE LAWS.
We're seeing First Amendment violations with respect to detainees' religious liberties, and faith organizations access to detainees. I've also seen violations of protesters' and objectors free speech and assembly rights.
The Kavanaugh Stops are Fourth Amendment violations of peoples' persons, property, homes, and papers with unreasonable searches and seizures with insufficient probable cause.
The Fifth Amendment is violated every time a gov't goon destroys private property and the owner is left on the hook for repairing or replacing what the gov't destroyed. (Interestingly enough, Greg Bovino's violation of court orders and perjury in his Chicago testimony may have eliminated the qualified immunity protections his goons would have otherwise enjoyed.)
The Eight Amendment (cruel and unusual punishment) has been routinely violated by the substandard conditions in the facilities where the gov't has detained folks it's rounded up.
Kavanaugh Stops' racial profiling are pretty clear violations of the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth amendment that fall shorts of the "compelling rationale" standard required to justify such discrimination.
"There are too many illegals to round up properly" is not a valid justification for violating the supreme law of the land. And as the post above highlights, EVEN when they DID violate the Constitution, ICE/CPB didn't even make the dent they wanted to make, as they spent so much time and effort processing people here legally that they improperly rounded up that it's not clear that they wouldn't get better results following the same deportation processes we've followed for the past couple of decades.
Kavanaugh stops are an imagined figment of some lefty journalist who writes for lefty outlets. The Supreme Court made it clear that the totality of the indicators determine probable cause.
I don't know who you are quoting with "There are too many illegals to round up properly". It certainly wasn't me. From what I've seen reported, the arrests and detentions of illegals have been effective and those arrested are nearly all guilty. And all of the violence I've seen has been instigated by the detainees and the protesters. Protesters ramming ICE vehicles do not make the LEOs responsible for property damage in violation of the 5th. Amendment.
We laymen evidently do not have a complete understanding of the supreme law of the land. Civil asset forfeiture, de-banking and lawfare would seem to be un-Constitutional but, so far, the Supremes have not agreed with me.
"The Supreme Court made it clear that the totality of the indicators determine probable cause."
The Supreme Court did no such thing. It (the Court) silently overturned a stay prohibiting the gov't from using racial appearance and language as factors in stopping and questioning people[1]. Unlike the five other members of the majority, Kavanaugh at least tried to explain in his concurrence (not the actual opinion) why he thought that was okay. Hence the name.
An opinion without reasoning and rationale is NOT clarity.
"From what I've seen reported, the arrests and detentions of illegals have been effective and those arrested are nearly all guilty."
Citation needed. Also include in your citation the number of US citizens and legal residents who were also detained and later released and for how long without official charges being brought. There are far too many examples like Dayanne Figueroa[2] to take this claim seriously without actual numbers backing them up.
"And all of the violence I've seen has been instigated by the detainees and the protesters. Protesters ramming ICE vehicles do not make the LEOs responsible for property damage in violation of the 5th. Amendment."
Again, FAR too many counter-examples to take this seriously without some numbers backing it. I'm not thinking so much of protesters (though they have PLENTY of evidence disproving the official gov't claims), but more of folks like Willy Aceituno, who had ICE shatter his truck window[3] or the residents of the Chicago apartment building whose doors were broken down and possessions destroyed when ICE/CPB decided stage an indiscriminate raid on the building[4].
"We laymen evidently do not have a complete understanding of the supreme law of the land."
You and I may not be the final arbiters on how that law is administered, but we can both read English and are responsible for understanding what it's supposed to mean. At least we're talking about that and discussing it, which is more than we can say for Chief Justice Roberts and Associate Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Coney-Barrett.
The entire opinion of Noem vs. Perdomo can be found here. appears to have been given due consideration.
Willy's statement: "Speaking with the Times, Aceituno said he was heading to breakfast before going to his construction job when he was approached in the parking lot by agents. He told the newspaper that they questioned him about his citizenship, but that he stalled answering them in order to help others nearby who might not have documentation on them."
What really happened with Figueroa: "U.S. Border Patrol was conducting a targeted immigration enforcement arrest of two illegal aliens when an individual used her vehicle to block in agents, honking her horn. As agents were departing, the driver, a U.S. citizen, used her Mercedes Benz to ram the agent’s vehicle," McLaughlin said. "In fear of public safety and of law enforcement, officers attempted to remove her from the vehicle. She violently resisted, kicking two agents and causing injuries. This agitator was arrested for assault on a federal agent."
These criminals and their sympathizers spew whatever lies promote their narrative and include accounts of relatives who have been kidnapped like the illegal who returned to his country of origin where he died and the admittedly totally made-up story of the granny who was abducted by ICE in California.
As I stated above, there is NO majority opinion, just Kavanaugh's concurrence and Sotomayor's dissent, which was joined by those voting against. Compare with the Dobbs case, where Alito is "delivering the opinion of the Court": https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf
In Noem, Kavanaugh is NOT speaking for the silent majority, he's agreeing with the outcome, but not the rationale (as none was given). If Kavanaugh's take on the topic was the one that the Court agreed with, that would be the opinion of the Court, but it very notably is JUST a concurrence.
Re: Willy Aceituno - What did he do that was a crime? Was he charged as an accessory? Was he charged with impeding an arrest? One of these days, DHS has to charge someone and see their conviction through.
Re: Dayanne Figueroa - There's ample witnesses and evidence contradicting the gov't's account of what happened, including ICE running into HER. She was released without charges later in the day. Why is ICE refusing to charge and convict those people you're calling "criminals"?
I don't know what's going to have to happen, but one of these days, you're going to realize that ICE/CPB/DHS spokespeople are making up stuff all the time, and when it comes time to prove what they are saying is true, they back off and pretend that they haven't been lying to the American people - INCLUDING YOU. This has been amply documented as soon as there's an actual penalty at play for peddling falsehoods. Just read the court records and testimony from all the times where these incidents did make it to the judge.
"We do not know what other crimes they be perpetrating."
We do know some crimes ICE/CPB agents are perpetrating:
1. Child Sex Trafficking: "According to Bloomington Police Chief Booker Hodges, officers started the three-day sting on Nov. 5. They used several methods to find people who were attempting to solicit a 17-year-old girl for sex."
"In all, police arrested 16 men during the investigation, which Hodges called 'Operation Creep.'"
"Hodges said most of the men came from within the Twin Cities area."
"One of the men, he said, is an employee for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, who could face federal charges. Hodges said the ICE employee works as an auditor."
"'When he was arrested, he said, 'I'm ICE, boys,'' Hodges said during a press conference Tuesday. 'Well, unfortunately for him, we locked him up.'" [1]
2. Drunk Driving: "The agent was sent to the Chicago area to be a part of Operation Midway Blitz, the immigration enforcement effort in which the Trump administration repeatedly has said drunk driving is reason enough for immigrants in the U.S. illegally to be detained and deported."
"Now an ICE agent participating in Operation Midway Blitz is charged with that same crime."
"Police said Diaz-Torres was asleep at the wheel during a crash in Oak Brook on Oct. 26." [2]
3. Possession and Use of Illegal Drugs: "A Border Patrol agent who was held up as a symbol of the impunity that critics say pervades the federal government’s immigration crackdown has died of an overdose, the Long Beach Post has learned."
"During a wild three-week stretch this summer, Agent Isaiah Hodgson was catapulted to notoriety by a video of him participating in the arrest of a U.S. citizen and, soon after, being arrested himself for allegedly drunkenly assaulting Long Beach police officers."
"In the first public disclosure of his cause of death, Hodgson’s attorney told a Long Beach Superior Court judge last week that, while awaiting trial, the 29-year-old died in August of an overdose at his parents’ Riverside County home. Authorities have not yet released an autopsy report that could provide more details about the circumstances." [3]
--
Who knows what other crimes these goons may be perpetrating off-the-clock? If they want to make a dent in crime and improve public safely, maybe they need to look a bit harder at the fellow in the car seat next to them, instead of the Walmart and Home Depot parking lots.
I'm just saying that if the outcome variable is "reducing crime" and you end up hiring criminals *who commit crimes* because you're in such a hurry to staff up, it would be helpful for that outcome variable if you're not contributing to the problem in the first place.
Hiring is half the issue - the other half is the poor training that the agents are getting that's causing a lot of these issues. They're being failed by a leadership more interested in making TikTok content than actually making people safer.
I've had people mention before that the reason for the rush is the (self-fulfilling) fear that they HAVE to go fast with a shock and awe approach, not because it's a good way to do the job, but to do it before the political opposition (both local - like the wine moms running ICE patrols outside schools - and national - elected Democrats and independents) hardens to a point where ICE/CPB are back where they started.
Then again, solving the problem has never been the goal - it's to keep immigration around as political issue that Trump could run on for President and now use as a pretext to see to what extent he can forge a cadre of enforcers in a manner that would be impossible with the FBI (too educated - college degree required).
A competent man with an attention span lasting longer than a minute might have pulled that off. (Build credibility in friendly zones like Tennessee and split the opposition in places like Chicago, THEN deploy to more challenging areas against a divided population.) America is fortunate that a moron tried to pull that lever first, and has done everything he could to sabotage his own effort.
Except of course that it in fact costs us more to remove them - considering the cost of the enforcement actions and the fact that they do in fact end up being a positive for the economy compared to how much they cost.
So: maybe not the best argument to be making here.
They are a net economic deficit. You can find some arguments to the contrary published by lefty organizations. The more balanced sources say they are not a net positive. https://cis.org/Report/High-Cost-Cheap-Labor
Removal costs are high only because of judges who exceed their authority (hopefully that will be settled soon) and by obstructive local governments and employers who want cheap labor.
They are not - but I get that you feel they would be. Suffice to state that a group that wants low immigration would highlight costs while ignoring benefits - and they themselves have weasel language in the linked study like "If the study is correct" - which is very well might not be (likely when numerous other studies find the opposite).
Removal costs include braindead use of military equipment while resulting in zero charges being made, and "bonuses" paid to recruiting new agents and the like.
This will end up costing us more than we save. You might think that's worth it in general, but then that's a different argument to be making.
The Executive Branch is duty bound to enforce the law. LEOs often have only one reason to justify detention. That's all they need. When the law is dealing with 20 million illegals, they can't just ignore one law to dig deeper prior to detention. There is a good chance that lawbreakers are guilty of other crimes.
I'm a bit confused with this one.
You state above, "The bishops wrote they are 'concerned about the conditions in detention centers and the lack of access to pastoral care,' and 'troubled by threats against the sanctity of houses of worship and the special nature of hospitals and schools.'"
Are these the statements that are "political"? Are they political in the same sense that the Church(es) pronouncements against abortion or divorce are political? Or are they out there witnessing, answering the question of "What would Jesus do?" in this scenario?
I'm curious why you imply that it's not their Christianity that has preachers out there protesting (and getting shot with pepperballs and manhandled by goons) and agitating for access to the imprisoned, and bishops standing up to say that all of this is contrary to their Scriptures, but instead because the funds cut by Elon's DOGE?
"The Trump administration is not completely indiscriminate in its actions. ICE is targeting illegal immigrants, and of that group, mostly those who were subject to detainers or other deportation orders in the past."
This is flat-out incorrect.
ICE wasn't going after immigrants (or people that look like immigrants) in the parking lots of Home Depot because they had paperwork indicating a specific individual would be there. ICE's modus operandi was to round everyone up that *looked* like they might be deportable, and to sort it out afterwards at their processing facility (i.e. find an excuse for the detention). ICE wasn't chasing down contractors working on suburban houses because they had actionable intelligence. ICE (and their pals in the Border Patrol) were casting wide *indiscriminate* dragnets to try and catch as many people as they could to meet their Stephen Miller quotas.
The Catholic statement isn't one that is playing politics over a difference in policy, but a concrete reaction - likely encouraged by their congregations - to protest the harms and evils being carried out in the real world right now. Greg Bovino has taken his circus to Charlotte - take a road trip one of these days and embed yourself with one of the faith-based communities to see how this plays out for yourself, instead of listening to the liars and shitposters running Homeland Security's communications.
Also note that the indiscriminate detentions have a name: Kavanaugh Stops.
https://www.lawdork.com/p/the-kavanaugh-stop-50-days-later
A solid post on the administration's recent immigration actions (and the outcomes):
"Most of all, the data shows that all of the Trump administration’s 'we’re arresting the worst of the worst' isn’t reality at all. Of 614 people included in a recent court order, just 16 of them — roughly two percent — had a meaningful existing criminal record. Those 16 — just sixteen! — included five with domestic battery charges, two drunken driving records, one narcotics convictions, and five who faced other battery charges, two of which involved guns, and one person who is said to have a criminal history in some country overseas. Just one was deemed a 'national security risk' and 'no one had any convictions for murder or rape,' the Chicago Tribune reported. The local police in a city like Chicago or D.C. surely arrest more serious criminals in run-of-the-mill encounters across a single weekend than CBP and ICE managed to round up in weeks."
https://www.doomsdayscenario.co/p/trump-border-patrol-retreat-in-failure-from-chicago
Matters not so long as they are deportable. Citizens go to prison for crimes that hurt no one. Al Capone was imprisoned for tax evasion. That particular offense probably cost USA taxpayers less than the cost of a few dozen illegals turned loose on society. A relative of mine spent several years in prison for infractions involving non-taxpaid alcoholic beverages and a couple of pounds of marijuana. I would say the maximum damage to the public was no more than $1000 - far less than one illegal dependent in the school system for a few months. I say the prison terms were more than justified just as is deportation of unvetted illegals. We do not know what other crimes they be perpetrating.
Yeah, but that doesn't give the gov't license to violate the US Constitution (1st, 4th, 5th, 8th, and 14th amendments, in particular) which is SUPREME over immigration and other laws AND THE ENFORCEMENT OF THOSE LAWS.
We're seeing First Amendment violations with respect to detainees' religious liberties, and faith organizations access to detainees. I've also seen violations of protesters' and objectors free speech and assembly rights.
The Kavanaugh Stops are Fourth Amendment violations of peoples' persons, property, homes, and papers with unreasonable searches and seizures with insufficient probable cause.
The Fifth Amendment is violated every time a gov't goon destroys private property and the owner is left on the hook for repairing or replacing what the gov't destroyed. (Interestingly enough, Greg Bovino's violation of court orders and perjury in his Chicago testimony may have eliminated the qualified immunity protections his goons would have otherwise enjoyed.)
The Eight Amendment (cruel and unusual punishment) has been routinely violated by the substandard conditions in the facilities where the gov't has detained folks it's rounded up.
Kavanaugh Stops' racial profiling are pretty clear violations of the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth amendment that fall shorts of the "compelling rationale" standard required to justify such discrimination.
"There are too many illegals to round up properly" is not a valid justification for violating the supreme law of the land. And as the post above highlights, EVEN when they DID violate the Constitution, ICE/CPB didn't even make the dent they wanted to make, as they spent so much time and effort processing people here legally that they improperly rounded up that it's not clear that they wouldn't get better results following the same deportation processes we've followed for the past couple of decades.
Kavanaugh stops are an imagined figment of some lefty journalist who writes for lefty outlets. The Supreme Court made it clear that the totality of the indicators determine probable cause.
I don't know who you are quoting with "There are too many illegals to round up properly". It certainly wasn't me. From what I've seen reported, the arrests and detentions of illegals have been effective and those arrested are nearly all guilty. And all of the violence I've seen has been instigated by the detainees and the protesters. Protesters ramming ICE vehicles do not make the LEOs responsible for property damage in violation of the 5th. Amendment.
We laymen evidently do not have a complete understanding of the supreme law of the land. Civil asset forfeiture, de-banking and lawfare would seem to be un-Constitutional but, so far, the Supremes have not agreed with me.
"The Supreme Court made it clear that the totality of the indicators determine probable cause."
The Supreme Court did no such thing. It (the Court) silently overturned a stay prohibiting the gov't from using racial appearance and language as factors in stopping and questioning people[1]. Unlike the five other members of the majority, Kavanaugh at least tried to explain in his concurrence (not the actual opinion) why he thought that was okay. Hence the name.
An opinion without reasoning and rationale is NOT clarity.
"From what I've seen reported, the arrests and detentions of illegals have been effective and those arrested are nearly all guilty."
Citation needed. Also include in your citation the number of US citizens and legal residents who were also detained and later released and for how long without official charges being brought. There are far too many examples like Dayanne Figueroa[2] to take this claim seriously without actual numbers backing them up.
"And all of the violence I've seen has been instigated by the detainees and the protesters. Protesters ramming ICE vehicles do not make the LEOs responsible for property damage in violation of the 5th. Amendment."
Again, FAR too many counter-examples to take this seriously without some numbers backing it. I'm not thinking so much of protesters (though they have PLENTY of evidence disproving the official gov't claims), but more of folks like Willy Aceituno, who had ICE shatter his truck window[3] or the residents of the Chicago apartment building whose doors were broken down and possessions destroyed when ICE/CPB decided stage an indiscriminate raid on the building[4].
"We laymen evidently do not have a complete understanding of the supreme law of the land."
You and I may not be the final arbiters on how that law is administered, but we can both read English and are responsible for understanding what it's supposed to mean. At least we're talking about that and discussing it, which is more than we can say for Chief Justice Roberts and Associate Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Coney-Barrett.
[1] https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/09/justice-brett-kavanaugh-and-racial-proxies/
[2] https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2025/11/04/chicago-woman-us-citizen-detained-by-immigration-agents/87074841007/
[3] https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/article312950879.html
[4] https://www.propublica.org/article/chicago-venezuela-immigration-ice-fbi-raids-no-criminal-charges
The entire opinion of Noem vs. Perdomo can be found here. appears to have been given due consideration.
Willy's statement: "Speaking with the Times, Aceituno said he was heading to breakfast before going to his construction job when he was approached in the parking lot by agents. He told the newspaper that they questioned him about his citizenship, but that he stalled answering them in order to help others nearby who might not have documentation on them."
What really happened with Figueroa: "U.S. Border Patrol was conducting a targeted immigration enforcement arrest of two illegal aliens when an individual used her vehicle to block in agents, honking her horn. As agents were departing, the driver, a U.S. citizen, used her Mercedes Benz to ram the agent’s vehicle," McLaughlin said. "In fear of public safety and of law enforcement, officers attempted to remove her from the vehicle. She violently resisted, kicking two agents and causing injuries. This agitator was arrested for assault on a federal agent."
These criminals and their sympathizers spew whatever lies promote their narrative and include accounts of relatives who have been kidnapped like the illegal who returned to his country of origin where he died and the admittedly totally made-up story of the granny who was abducted by ICE in California.
"Noem vs. Perdomo" link: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/25a169_5h25.pdf
As I stated above, there is NO majority opinion, just Kavanaugh's concurrence and Sotomayor's dissent, which was joined by those voting against. Compare with the Dobbs case, where Alito is "delivering the opinion of the Court": https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf
In Noem, Kavanaugh is NOT speaking for the silent majority, he's agreeing with the outcome, but not the rationale (as none was given). If Kavanaugh's take on the topic was the one that the Court agreed with, that would be the opinion of the Court, but it very notably is JUST a concurrence.
Re: Willy Aceituno - What did he do that was a crime? Was he charged as an accessory? Was he charged with impeding an arrest? One of these days, DHS has to charge someone and see their conviction through.
Re: Dayanne Figueroa - There's ample witnesses and evidence contradicting the gov't's account of what happened, including ICE running into HER. She was released without charges later in the day. Why is ICE refusing to charge and convict those people you're calling "criminals"?
I don't know what's going to have to happen, but one of these days, you're going to realize that ICE/CPB/DHS spokespeople are making up stuff all the time, and when it comes time to prove what they are saying is true, they back off and pretend that they haven't been lying to the American people - INCLUDING YOU. This has been amply documented as soon as there's an actual penalty at play for peddling falsehoods. Just read the court records and testimony from all the times where these incidents did make it to the judge.
"We do not know what other crimes they be perpetrating."
We do know some crimes ICE/CPB agents are perpetrating:
1. Child Sex Trafficking: "According to Bloomington Police Chief Booker Hodges, officers started the three-day sting on Nov. 5. They used several methods to find people who were attempting to solicit a 17-year-old girl for sex."
"In all, police arrested 16 men during the investigation, which Hodges called 'Operation Creep.'"
"Hodges said most of the men came from within the Twin Cities area."
"One of the men, he said, is an employee for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, who could face federal charges. Hodges said the ICE employee works as an auditor."
"'When he was arrested, he said, 'I'm ICE, boys,'' Hodges said during a press conference Tuesday. 'Well, unfortunately for him, we locked him up.'" [1]
2. Drunk Driving: "The agent was sent to the Chicago area to be a part of Operation Midway Blitz, the immigration enforcement effort in which the Trump administration repeatedly has said drunk driving is reason enough for immigrants in the U.S. illegally to be detained and deported."
"Now an ICE agent participating in Operation Midway Blitz is charged with that same crime."
"Police said Diaz-Torres was asleep at the wheel during a crash in Oak Brook on Oct. 26." [2]
3. Possession and Use of Illegal Drugs: "A Border Patrol agent who was held up as a symbol of the impunity that critics say pervades the federal government’s immigration crackdown has died of an overdose, the Long Beach Post has learned."
"During a wild three-week stretch this summer, Agent Isaiah Hodgson was catapulted to notoriety by a video of him participating in the arrest of a U.S. citizen and, soon after, being arrested himself for allegedly drunkenly assaulting Long Beach police officers."
"In the first public disclosure of his cause of death, Hodgson’s attorney told a Long Beach Superior Court judge last week that, while awaiting trial, the 29-year-old died in August of an overdose at his parents’ Riverside County home. Authorities have not yet released an autopsy report that could provide more details about the circumstances." [3]
--
Who knows what other crimes these goons may be perpetrating off-the-clock? If they want to make a dent in crime and improve public safely, maybe they need to look a bit harder at the fellow in the car seat next to them, instead of the Walmart and Home Depot parking lots.
[1] https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/bloomington-sex-trafficking-sting/
[2] https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/ice-agent-arrested-drunk-driving-oak-brook-broadview/
[3] https://lbpost.com/news/isaiah-hodgson-drunk-border-patrol-arrest-long-beach-overdose/
Not sure how criminal behavior by some individuals excuses criminal behavior by others. Perhaps your Boolean skills can develop a new logic.
I'm just saying that if the outcome variable is "reducing crime" and you end up hiring criminals *who commit crimes* because you're in such a hurry to staff up, it would be helpful for that outcome variable if you're not contributing to the problem in the first place.
Good try man. I can actually detect some logic there. Better hiring practices could increase the net positive result.
Hiring is half the issue - the other half is the poor training that the agents are getting that's causing a lot of these issues. They're being failed by a leadership more interested in making TikTok content than actually making people safer.
I've had people mention before that the reason for the rush is the (self-fulfilling) fear that they HAVE to go fast with a shock and awe approach, not because it's a good way to do the job, but to do it before the political opposition (both local - like the wine moms running ICE patrols outside schools - and national - elected Democrats and independents) hardens to a point where ICE/CPB are back where they started.
Then again, solving the problem has never been the goal - it's to keep immigration around as political issue that Trump could run on for President and now use as a pretext to see to what extent he can forge a cadre of enforcers in a manner that would be impossible with the FBI (too educated - college degree required).
A competent man with an attention span lasting longer than a minute might have pulled that off. (Build credibility in friendly zones like Tennessee and split the opposition in places like Chicago, THEN deploy to more challenging areas against a divided population.) America is fortunate that a moron tried to pull that lever first, and has done everything he could to sabotage his own effort.
Except of course that it in fact costs us more to remove them - considering the cost of the enforcement actions and the fact that they do in fact end up being a positive for the economy compared to how much they cost.
So: maybe not the best argument to be making here.
They are a net economic deficit. You can find some arguments to the contrary published by lefty organizations. The more balanced sources say they are not a net positive. https://cis.org/Report/High-Cost-Cheap-Labor
Removal costs are high only because of judges who exceed their authority (hopefully that will be settled soon) and by obstructive local governments and employers who want cheap labor.
They are not - but I get that you feel they would be. Suffice to state that a group that wants low immigration would highlight costs while ignoring benefits - and they themselves have weasel language in the linked study like "If the study is correct" - which is very well might not be (likely when numerous other studies find the opposite).
Removal costs include braindead use of military equipment while resulting in zero charges being made, and "bonuses" paid to recruiting new agents and the like.
This will end up costing us more than we save. You might think that's worth it in general, but then that's a different argument to be making.
The Executive Branch is duty bound to enforce the law. LEOs often have only one reason to justify detention. That's all they need. When the law is dealing with 20 million illegals, they can't just ignore one law to dig deeper prior to detention. There is a good chance that lawbreakers are guilty of other crimes.