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.
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.
Uhhh… those are called crimes.
I’m sorry, were ICE agents just entirely above the law before this ruling???
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?
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”.
I’m just hoping they wake tf up and move on to “treat them like a hostile faction.”
Yep, thats a gang based on hate who obscure their members. Seems like something the national guard should be called in for.
You’re not gonna believe this, but the national guard was called in for it. By the gang, to help the gang.
Probably not.
Most cops, like most humans, don’t particularly want to die.
Kneeling to fascism is worse than death.
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.
What I’m doing here at my keyboard in the A/C, and I haven’t run the A/C at all this week btw, would not be allowed in a Fascism. Nor would participating in protests such as the No Kings protest last Saturday. Nor would it even be viable if allowed when ICE Gestapo are tearing through apartment buildings and filling the streets with tear gas, and while soulless monopolies keep raising rent and food prices.
This is not some far away issue people can just ignore, it’s your problem sooner or later.
That’s a great speech but it has almost nothing to do with what I said.
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.
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.
Qualified Immunity is such bullshit.
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
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.
Crimes are one type of unlawful act.
Civil torts are the other.
Historically, Civil Rights Act lawsuits were some of the more potent tools against corrupt police. Obviously that’s going to be different under Trump.
There’s a difference between an action that is part of the penal code that includes specific punishments, and actions that a government agency/worker does not have authority to perform. Some of these overlap, but not all
Supreme Court said Donald could not be arrested for committing crimes as president. I think we’re just a step away from them giving immunity to Donald’s personal police.
https://statedemocracy.law.wisc.edu/featured/2025/explainer-can-states-prosecute-federal-officials/
Only in practice. Federal officers have always been able to be arrested and tried for state crimes if they are unreasonably outside the scope of their official duties.
Yeah they were, and its not a big Surprise since they were made to be over the law