The decision issued October 7 by U.S. District Judge Jeffrey I. Cummings extends court oversight of the agency until February 2, 2026, and warns that officers who disregard the order could face contempt or criminal referral.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 170 points 1 year ago (15 children)

unlawful actions

Uhhh... those are called crimes.

I'm sorry, were ICE agents just entirely above the law before this ruling???

  • source
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 92 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Still are.

    Sure, the ruling says they CAN be arrested for doing illegal things. But are they going to be? Cop sees ICE beating down a brown person. Is the cop going to run over and arrest them?

    Or will they assist ICE?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 40 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Depends on the city, and their leadership. Some cities have already directed their police specifically not to assist ICE. Not a huge jump from there to "treat them like a regular civilian".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] 17 points 1 year ago (4 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    Probably not.

    Most cops, like most humans, don't particularly want to die.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    They said, comfortably at their keyboard in the A/C, via a device ostensibly constructed due to authoritarian regimes forcing brutal conditions on their workers.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago*

    Many cities were doing this from the beginning. Whenever you read the term “sanctuary cities” it was really just a promise not to help.

    Local police are not allowed to assist federal agencies enforce their policies unless it is a crime locally. You can even argue this prevents turf wars and conflicts of authority. States rights y’all

    Local prisons are not allowed to detain people that have not been legally convicted of something that is a crime locally. You can argue this protects state resources being exploited by unfunded federal mandates. States rights y’all

    But no, it’s a YUGE jump to actively interfere, even if it is to enforce laws against federal agents.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 30 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I'm sorry, were ICE agents just entirely above the law before this ruling???

    Police, by default, are thanks to Qualified Immunity. It takes a judge and a shit ton of evidence to waive that inherent protection. Even for situations where the officers were violating constitutional and statutory rights, and even someone with a severe mental handicap would know clearly that those actions were illegal.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago*

    No, technically they’re not. Cops could always be arrested for unlawful actions. And “qualified immunity” includes the word “qualified”.

    This is Just like the the literal/figurative debacle: for some reason people are good with redefining a word as it’s opposite. literal now means figurative. “Qualified” now means “complete”

    This is a start because it declares federal agents are the same, but as long as qualified immunity means complete immunity it’s only limited help in restoring law

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    Uhhh… those are called crimes.

    Sort of. In most places, they will be the same, but in legal terms for law enforcement, "unlawful" really means that it isn't permitted by the law. The action might not be criminal, as in there is a law forbidding it. Again, in most places that means the actions are illegal, because of laws that criminalize the violation of a person's civil rights, but that's not always the case.

  • source
  • parent