back
45 comments
So it's not only the ICE officers who are so ashamed of what they're doing that they have to hide, but it's the lawyers as well.
Wouldn't want to be immortalized in history books.
More likely, they don't want to be attacked at home by the kind of people who ambushed ICE agents on July 4th. [1]

Or by the cartels, for whom smuggling people into the United States is a lucrative (and violent) business. [2]

1: https://abcnews.go.com/US/10-arrested-after-ambush-texas-ice...

2: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/25/us/migrant-smuggling-evol...

Yeah, I'm not buying it at all. Those sorts of risks are hardly new, and have been effectively handled before without resorting to these sorts of measures. What's so different now?

The obvious intent is to terrify the general population with masked shock troops. This is third world warlord shit. It's more likely that what the lawyers are afraid of is their employability after this nightmare is ended.

You're not "buying it"?

Right here in this very discussion there are comments calling for "violent revolution" and the "duty of the American people to overthrow [the government], up to and including violence".

The threat of violence against government agents is very real. If you don't see, it's only because you don't want to see.

I didn't say the threat of violence wasn't real. What's new is this kind of response to it, which is why I don't think it's really that threat that is the the reason for it. It's the sort of response that only makes everything worse for everybody.
Wearing masks is a very gentle response to the threat, compared to the kinds of things that have been done in the past. The historic response to threats against the police was excessive force and extrajudicial killings.
Don't confuse fear with shame.

Who wouldn't be afraid of their lives and their families safety, when there's aggressive mobs, both on- and off- line, waiting to doxx or physically assault you for doing your job and enforcing the law?

Maybe it's a sign that what they're doing is wrong.
Or maybe it’s a sign that the people they are apprehending and those that support them are sociopaths.
No such thing as "doxxing" a public servant.
You don't know what you're talking about.
these are champions of "if your not doing anything wrong you have nothing to hide"; the carve-out; [until it applies to me], is usually not mentioned
It's almost like someone learned the wrong lesson from the Neureberg trials.
My opinion: making people go home is not the same thing as genocide.
Except they aren’t sending them home, they’re cruelly sending them to unstable countries they aren’t from and putting their lives at risk. I wouldn’t call that justice. It’s closer to genocide than not. We can and should do better.
Wow, what horrible things must you think about Latin America to believe that sending people there is "putting their lives at risk".

People are sent to third countries (with permission from that country) because they say they can't return to their own country. Why wouldn't they be safe in another Spanish speaking nation that agreed to accept them? Latin America isn't a death trap.

Sending dissidents/LGBTQ people home to many South American countries is a death trap. Labeling them as criminals (without due process, I might add) also can be.

They aren't sending immigrants back to each immigrant's preferred, safe country, as you insinuate; they're sending back to their country of origin.

> Sending dissidents/LGBTQ people home to many South American countries is a death trap

That's exactly the kind of ignorance I'm talking about.

Same-sex marriage is legal in most (by population and area) of Latin America. Nations that haven't legalized that still have laws that ban anti-gay discrimination. English colonies like Jamaica and Guyana are worse. Many parts of the US are worse.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBTQ_rights_in_the_Americas

"Outside of the North Atlantic, no region in the world has undergone more progress in expanding LGBT legal rights than Latin America"

"Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking Latin American countries (SPLA) are unquestionably in the lead in the region. If one excludes non-SPLA countries, which are mostly small countries in the Caribbean, the record of progress is even more impressive."

- LGBTQ+ Victory Institute

https://victoryinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/LAC-...

Respectfully, the notion that routing asylum-seekers (especially those who are LGBT or political dissidents) to “any” Latin-American country is harmless overlooks both geography and evidence. Under the Trump-era “Remain in Mexico,” Title 42 expulsions, and the Asylum-Cooperative Agreement with Guatemala, people were removed not to Argentina or Uruguay but overwhelmingly to northern Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador (countries with some of the highest homicide and kidnapping rates in the world). Human Rights Watch, Médecins Sans Frontières, and even the U.S. DHS Inspector General documented hundreds of rapes, assaults, disappearances and murders of migrants forced to wait or seek refuge there. International law calls this potential “refoulement”; it is precisely why UNHCR and multiple U.S. courts said the policies placed lives at risk.

Citing marriage equality in Brazil or Chile does nothing to change the reality in the Northern Triangle, where same-sex marriage is illegal, hate-crime enforcement is weak, and impunity for anti-LGBT violence hovers around 80–90 percent. Honduras has recorded more than 470 LGBT murders since 2009; Guatemala’s congress tried in 2022 to criminalize sex education and explicitly ban gay marriage; El Salvador’s LGBT activists report routine police harassment and gang “social cleansing.” Saying “many parts of the U.S. are worse” ignores that federal law now protects LGBT workers nationwide and that homicide rates for LGBT people are a fraction of those in the receiving countries. In short, legal progress in parts of Latin America is real, but deporting vulnerable people to Guatemala, Honduras or Mexico is demonstrably dangerous and, for many, a potential death sentence.

South Sudan is in Latin America?

"South Sudan descended into a civil war from 2013 to 2020, enduring rampant human rights abuses, including forced displacement, ethnic massacres, and killings of journalists by various parties."

That's true, South Sudan is a terrible place to deport people. But the eight people who were deported there are terrible people.

Most were murderers. One was convicted of sexually abusing a 12 year old. One was only convicted of robbery and assault, but South Sudan was his country of origin.

“No country on Earth wanted to accept them because their crimes are so uniquely monstrous and barbaric,” said Tricia McLaughlin, a spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security.

https://apnews.com/article/deportees-south-sudan-ice-immigra...

However vile a person’s crimes, he doesn’t lose the basic rights that belong to every human being. Government can lock him up if the law allows, but it can’t knowingly dump him in a place where he’s almost certain to be tortured, starved, or killed. That crosses the Eighth-Amendment line against cruel and unusual punishment, ignores the court’s authority, and shifts our problems onto another country instead of taking responsibility for them ourselves. A republic built on natural rights and the rule of law simply doesn’t get to outsource suffering.