ICE is using facial recognition tech on US citizens without their consent, according to DHS documents obtained by 404 Media. Despite such software's unreliability, agents may ignore a citizen's birth certificate if the app says they're in the US illegally.
Does the US legal system still exist in any sense that it should in a democracy?
I ask because I don’t understand how all this is possible in a constitutional state: Masked brutes who arbitrarily kidnap people on the open street without even identifying themselves, people who are interned without due process and then often simply disappear without a trace in the administrative system, total surveillance without cause, and many other massive violations that the US legal system seems to enable rather than prevent, as it should.
All of this already looks very much like a dictatorship to me, i.e., an unjust state, as none of this can be possible with a democratic constitution - at least not with one that is actually upheld by the legal system.
It does not. The legal system has essentially lost the ability to be a check on the power of the executive branch. Partly because of the capture of the judiciary and regulatory bodies by right-wing extremists and partly because of the speed at which the executive branch is acting illegally - it takes time to build cases and the jsutice system can’t keep up.
The judiciary “interprets” the constitution. Trump filled the judiciary with loyalist or otherwise ideologically aligned judges during this term and his previous. The supreme court ruled last year that the president has immunity, and the president has the ability to pardon people, so it seems the administration is pretty much “above the law.” Even when the courts do push back, they’re acting like they’re powerless, and the admin’s tactics seems to be just ignoring, stalling, or taking the “ain’t no rules says a dog can’t play basketball” approach to working around the courts. Yes, the constitution has been severely weakened, and will probably continue to weaken.
I’m not going to excuse ICE and all the shit they are up to. I’m just going to point out that immigration status doesn’t require the same process to determine as the guilt or innocence of some other crime. In a murder trial, you have to prove motive, opportunity, etc beyond a reasonable doubt. With immigration status, it’s simpler: either you can document your legal right to be in the country or you can’t. When someone isn’t supposed to be in the country we don’t jail them for years to rehabilitate them and then release them into the population. We remove them. So everything about this feels and looks different from a standard criminal due process because it is different. Even without the aggressive tactics, masks, and all attendant bullshit, it would still be different.
Due process is recognized as a human‑rights protection in almost all democratic countries and generally applies regardless of citizenship; it helps prevent arbitrariness and abuse of power.
The fundamental safeguard against arbitrary state detention is habeas corpus or its functional equivalent: a person detained must be brought before a judge so the lawfulness of the detention can be reviewed and so the detainee can be informed of the charges against them.
ICE denies detainees even this, for which there can be absolutely no excuse in any reasonably civilized country.
Does the US legal system still exist in any sense that it should in a democracy?
I ask because I don’t understand how all this is possible in a constitutional state: Masked brutes who arbitrarily kidnap people on the open street without even identifying themselves, people who are interned without due process and then often simply disappear without a trace in the administrative system, total surveillance without cause, and many other massive violations that the US legal system seems to enable rather than prevent, as it should.
All of this already looks very much like a dictatorship to me, i.e., an unjust state, as none of this can be possible with a democratic constitution - at least not with one that is actually upheld by the legal system.
It does not. The legal system has essentially lost the ability to be a check on the power of the executive branch. Partly because of the capture of the judiciary and regulatory bodies by right-wing extremists and partly because of the speed at which the executive branch is acting illegally - it takes time to build cases and the jsutice system can’t keep up.
The judiciary “interprets” the constitution. Trump filled the judiciary with loyalist or otherwise ideologically aligned judges during this term and his previous. The supreme court ruled last year that the president has immunity, and the president has the ability to pardon people, so it seems the administration is pretty much “above the law.” Even when the courts do push back, they’re acting like they’re powerless, and the admin’s tactics seems to be just ignoring, stalling, or taking the “ain’t no rules says a dog can’t play basketball” approach to working around the courts. Yes, the constitution has been severely weakened, and will probably continue to weaken.
Land of the free (for white people)
I’m not going to excuse ICE and all the shit they are up to. I’m just going to point out that immigration status doesn’t require the same process to determine as the guilt or innocence of some other crime. In a murder trial, you have to prove motive, opportunity, etc beyond a reasonable doubt. With immigration status, it’s simpler: either you can document your legal right to be in the country or you can’t. When someone isn’t supposed to be in the country we don’t jail them for years to rehabilitate them and then release them into the population. We remove them. So everything about this feels and looks different from a standard criminal due process because it is different. Even without the aggressive tactics, masks, and all attendant bullshit, it would still be different.
Due process is recognized as a human‑rights protection in almost all democratic countries and generally applies regardless of citizenship; it helps prevent arbitrariness and abuse of power.
The fundamental safeguard against arbitrary state detention is habeas corpus or its functional equivalent: a person detained must be brought before a judge so the lawfulness of the detention can be reviewed and so the detainee can be informed of the charges against them.
ICE denies detainees even this, for which there can be absolutely no excuse in any reasonably civilized country.