BigRedBuster
Well-known member
:laughpound
Cool, so literally state sanction domestic terrorism then. Literally intimidating and scaring people by arresting them in court, at churches, hospitals, jobs, sporting events, etc. Cool, coolYes. The padres are up 1-0 in the third.
CBP only handles immigration issues at the border, so they shouldn't have been there either. Both are under DHS.CBP and ICE aren’t the same thing though Brian.
CBP can search and seize without a warrant within 100 miles of the border, but LA would be just outside of their purview. So, I believe they can still operate but they would be in a more traditional roll requiring probable cause and warrants.CBP only handles immigration issues at the border, so they shouldn't have been there either. Both are under DHS.
I’m not disputing anything you said.CBP only handles immigration issues at the border, so they shouldn't have been there either. Both are under DHS.
:laughpoundCBP can search and seize without a warrant within 100 miles of the border, but LA would be just outside of their purview. So, I believe they can still operate but they would be in a more traditional roll requiring probable cause and warrants.
:laughpound
I know, right!:laughpound
Probable cause and warrants.
Silly rabbit, that was before Trump.
WTAF?https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-lede/how-my-reporting-on-the-columbia-protests-led-to-my-deportation
How My Reporting on the Columbia Protests Led to My Deportation
As an Australian who wrote about the demonstrations while on campus, I gave my phone a superficial clean before flying to the U.S. I underestimated what I was up against.
Many people are detained at U.S. airports for reasons they find arbitrary and mysterious. I got lucky—when I was stopped by Customs and Border Protection last week, after flying to Los Angeles from Melbourne, a border agent told me, explicitly and proudly, why I’d been pulled out of the customs line. “Look, we both know why you are here,” the agent told me. He identified himself to me as Adam, though his colleagues referred to him as Officer Martinez. When I said that I didn’t, he looked surprised. “It’s because of what you wrote online about the protests at Columbia University,” he said.
They were waiting for me when I got off the plane. Officer Martinez intercepted me before I entered primary processing and took me immediately into an interrogation room in the back, where he took my phone and demanded my passcode. When I refused, I was told I would be immediately sent back home if I did not comply. I should have taken that deal and opted for the quick deportation. But in that moment, dazed from my fourteen-hour flight, I believed C.B.P. would let me into the U.S. once they realized they were dealing with a middling writer from regional Australia. So I complied.
Then began the first “interview.” The questions focussed almost entirely on my reporting about the Columbia student protests. From 2022 to 2024, I attended Columbia for an M.F.A. program, on a student visa, and when the encampment began in April of last year I began publishing daily missives to my Substack, a blog that virtually no one (except, apparently, the U.S. government) seemed to read. To Officer Martinez, the pieces were highly concerning. He asked me what I thought about “it all,” meaning the conflict on campus, as well as the conflict between Israel and Hamas. He asked my opinion of Israel, of Hamas, of the student protesters. He asked if I was friends with any Jews. He asked for my views on a one- versus a two-state solution. He asked who was at fault: Israel or Palestine. He asked what Israel should do differently. (The Department of Homeland Security, which governs the C.B.P., claims that any allegations that I’d been arrested for political beliefs are false.)
Then he asked me to name students involved in the protests. He asked which WhatsApp groups, of student protesters, I was a member of. He asked who fed me “the information” about the protests. He asked me to give up the identities of people I “worked with.”
...
Martinez and another officer took me in the back, pushed me against the wall and patted me down. Martinez made sure that I carried no weaponry between my penis and my scrotum. They took the shoelaces out of my shoes and the string out of my elastic pants, presumably so that I would not be able to hang myself. This struck me as overly cautious, but as I entered the detention room I changed my mind. We were so deep in the building, and so clearly underground, that the very notion of a window started to feel like something from a half-remembered dream. Three months ago, a Canadian woman was disappeared into the system for nearly two weeks. I did not know then whether I would be out in one hour, one day, or one month. When I was brought into the room, I encountered a young woman, in tears, begging the guard for information. He told her he had no information to give her and that none would be forthcoming. “That woman,” he said, pointing to a bundle of blankets in the corner, “has been here for four days.”
After that I started to spiral. We detainees were banned from talking to one another. There wasn’t anyone I could communicate with, anyway—a barrier in the room separated the men from the women, and I was the only man. There was food—cup noodles mostly—and a vending machine with M&M’s and Coca-Cola that we could use “if we had brought cash,” one of the guards told me. The room was so cold that all of us were wrapped in C.B.P. blankets.
...
About three hours later, after I passed out on a cot in the detention pen, an officer shouted and woke me up. I was taken to another room and subjected to a second interview, one I did not know was coming, in which all the same questions of the first interview were repeated. I lost my patience with this new guy, Officer Woo. “If you are already going to deport me,” I asked him, “why should I answer any of your questions?”
He seemed shocked at that. “We haven’t decided if we are going to deport you yet,” he said. Then he paused. “But looking at your file . . . I can see why the other officer told you you were going home.”
This second interview had a “Groundhog Day” quality to it, except I was glad for the repetition. We encountered errors in Martinez’s notes. At one point, when I told Woo that the demonstrations at Columbia were “pro-peace” protests, he looked at me with real surprise. “I thought they were pro-Hamas protests?” he asked, quite genuinely. I was stunned by the innocence he brought to a question I found violently absurd. He couldn’t seem to bear the look I gave him then, a look somewhere between horror, exasperation, and fury, and, in embarrassment, he started to laugh.