Why is it illegal to uphold federal law? Isn't it the state law that is illegal in this case?
States are not obligated to participate in the enforcement of federal law, and are entitled to control the official conduct of their own officers and agencies.
If a state has a law that prohibits local police officers from furnishing data to federal agencies, that law is completely valid, and officers that act contrary to it are in violation of state law.
If it was an arrest, wouldn't they be charged with a crime or released after a short processing time if not actually charged? If it was an arrest, why not have the officers properly identify themselves?
Kidnapping does have specific legal meaning depending on jurisdiction. But it also has a common meaning of "the action of abducting someone and holding them captive". Abduction has a common definition of "the action of taking someone away by force or deception". Do these actions not fit these definitions?
You're acting like it's impossible for the government to kidnap or abduct people. Seems like quite a limited world view to believe such a thing.
ICE officers are required to identify themselves “as soon as practical or safe” as a regulation. They are not required to identify themselves in the same manner as state police because they are not state officers, they are federal officers. Federal law applies to them, not state law. Again, zero non-standard conduct from ICE.
> Do these actions not fit these definitions?
No they absolutely do not, because we’re talking about law enforcement so the only reasonable frame of reference is the legal definition of these words not the “I feel like it” definition. By your definition all arrests are “taking someone away by force” and are therefore abduction: obviously a stupid definition.
I think it’s entirely possible for the government to abduct people: please don’t put strawman words into my mouth. You have, however provided zero evidence to make your case and in fact demonstrated quite clearly that you don't understand the most basic everyday workings of our legal system.
This isn't happening for these people. They're being locked up for weeks to months without any due process at all. They're being sent to overseas prisons indefinitely once again without ever facing such arraignment or charges or a courtroom. You're saying this is normal, and yet saying an arraignment must occur within 48 hours. Which is normal, being held for months without an arraignment or being released within 48 hours if not being officially charged?
The cognitive dissonance here is astounding. An arraignment must happen or its not normal, but arraignments not happening without being released is normal.
> we’re talking about law enforcement so the only reasonable frame of reference is the legal definition of these words
> I think it’s entirely possible for the government to abduct people
So, the government can choose to pick people up on the street without identifying themselves and lock them away indefinitely in overseas prisons without any arraignment or charges or court case and argue they're removed from the jurisdiction of the US court system, but it's not abduction because the government says it's not. I guess the government only abducts people when it says it abducts people, guess there's nothing to worry about then.
I'm not trying to talk to some specific legal definition in a court of law; I'm speaking to morality. Plainclothes agents failing to identify themselves to normal people and shoving them into the backs of unmarked cars isn't a good thing to do. Having this just become a normal part of life seems pretty fucked up to me, but maybe that's the world you prefer to live in.
I can't see how anyone can look at cases like Abregio Garcia's as anything but kidnapping. He had a legal status of "withholding of removal". His status was changed without any notification to him other than when he was "arrested". No worries though, he'll be arraigned in 48 hours or be charged, right? Nope. Sent to CECOT to be detained indefinitely without having any charges levied against him, and seemingly without having any other options of self-deportation. He wasn't officially charged with a crime until he was removed from CECOT months later and brought back to the US. Where was that arraignment? Where was the due process?
I can't see how anyone can look at cases like Mahmoud Khalil's as anything but kidnapping. He had a green card. He was detained for over 100 days, was seemingly close to also be sent to CECOT indefinitely. To this day he still has not officially been charged with a crime.
And to think what has happened to these people has happened to at least hundreds of others. People without any criminal backgrounds. People never formally charged with a crime. Currently in ICE detention facilities with no clear release date, no court date, no right legal representation, some even in overseas prisons.
> By your definition all arrests are “taking someone away by force” and are therefore abduction: obviously a stupid definition.
A police shooting that results in the death of someone is a homicide. It is potentially a legally and morally justifiable homicide, but it is still a homicide. We agree words can have a legal definition separate from the dictionary definition, right? It's not wrong to use the dictionary definition when we're not a lawyer arguing a case in a courtroom, right?
If you have ever gone backpacking for any length of time, you will have met large numbers of people all over the developing world from Europe, Australia and America who are living there and working illegally. In general the result of being caught is being asked to leave and come back with a new visa, and not being violently arrested and thrown into a concentration camp indefinitely.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alligator_Alcatraz#/media/File...
Or quickly sent to the Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo in El Salvador, once again without any kind of hearing or choice of potential outcomes?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_Confinement_Center#/...
Do you believe in due process? Do you think it's wrong to send people to these places without any due process, without formally being charged with a crime, and without any clear release date established?
Due process is the process that is due! It's not a court hearing it's a much more simplified process.
If the process to get into the country is next to none, then the process to get out is the same.
And even now, the day they announce alligator alc they said, download CBP Home app and get 1k and a free plane ticket!!!!!!
Due process, on the other hand, is a fundamental right of democratic systems. Yet this feature too is being curtailed - in favor of concentrations camps.
Billionaires have made scapegoats out of a racial minority. Basic humans rights are violated. Our democracy is in shambles thanks to this group - through their subversion of democratic processes and the undermining of democratic rights. What we are witnessing is not democracy - quite the opposite.
California law also makes it illegal to do federal enforcement with state resources and specifically makes sharing this license plate information with federal investigators by state and local police illegal.
This has nothing to do with the supremacy of federal law over state law. It has to do with who does the enforcement of these laws. It is similarly illegal for me to enforce federal law, but I am certainly bound by it.
I'll give you a hint: none.
The federal government and DOJ has declined to prosecute Marijuana, but they definitely have the right to do so.
Some states took over a decade after Brown v Board to actually integrate school systems. So again, another instance of state laws seeming to trump federal laws.
If the idea is just not enforcing the supremacy of federal laws is enough, then not enforcing the federal law over the state law which bar sharing info with federal agencies is also in place here so far