A recent report from Civicus has placed the United States on a watchlist, expressing urgent concern over the state of its civic society, citing “sustained attacks on civic freedoms.” The report highlights issues such as the use of military force against protestors, growing restrictions on journalists and civil society organizations, and the targeting of anti-war advocates, particularly those expressing solidarity with Palestinian rights. Civicus assigned the US a “narrowed” rating, indicating that while freedoms of association, assembly, and expression are still allowed, violations do occur, including harassment and excessive force against protestors. Secretary General Mandeep Tiwana expressed concern over the situation, pointing to actions taken by the Trump administration as evidence of a dangerous trend toward authoritarianism.
Read More
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is broadening its arrest practices, targeting individuals connected to those they already consider criminals. This expansion comes amid protests against immigration raids in the Los Angeles area, with the government also focusing on people aiding protesters or identifying ICE agents. These actions follow a federal judge’s order to halt indiscriminate ICE raids, specifically criticizing the use of appearance or occupation as a basis for arrest. Now, those accused of assisting anti-ICE activities are facing prosecution or investigation, as seen in the indictment of a man who distributed face shields to protesters. This broadening of what is considered criminal activity also includes the investigation of individuals providing information about ICE agents.
Read More
George Retes, a U.S. citizen and Army veteran, was detained by federal immigration agents during a raid on a marijuana farm where he worked. Detained for three days without explanation, he missed his daughter’s third birthday celebration. Retes was injured during the raid and denied medical care. While in custody, he was not allowed to contact his family. After his release, Retes was not charged with any crime.
Read More
The whole idea of a bill that would prevent ICE from detaining or deporting US citizens feels almost surreal, doesn’t it? It’s like, isn’t that precisely what the Constitution is meant to cover? The very foundation of our rights and freedoms? The fact that this has even become a subject for legislation is, frankly, staggering. It makes you wonder what exactly has happened to the common sense we used to rely on.
It’s a bit mind-boggling that we’re at a point where we need a specific bill to prevent a government agency from doing something that should be fundamentally off-limits. The consensus seems to be that this is already illegal and unconstitutional.… Continue reading
With $75 billion in new funding, ICE will expand its operations to round up and deport millions of people over the next few years. This influx of money will lead to increased enforcement, potentially targeting long-term residents and those with minor infractions, similar to the arrest quotas seen in police states. Detention centers are planned to hold approximately 120,000 people daily, indicating a vast expansion of the existing system. The new policies will lead to the deportation of migrants working in fields not protected by the current administration. Despite the potential for pushback, the funding for ICE seems secure, with little expectation of cuts.
Read More
The recently passed budget, signed by the president, heavily favors the wealthy through tax cuts while simultaneously cutting healthcare and food programs for the poor. A significant portion of the budget is allocated to expanding Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), creating a massive domestic police force with unprecedented resources and authority. This expansion includes funding for detention facilities, hiring thousands of new agents, and constructing a border wall, further militarizing the border. The budget also increases fees for immigrants, seemingly designed to generate revenue from those most vulnerable. This combination of economic inequality and increased policing foreshadows a potential police state, blurring the lines between military operations and civilian law enforcement to suppress dissent and protect the elite.
Read More
Driven by the Trump administration’s hardline stance on immigration, the Justice Department is targeting naturalized citizens for denaturalization. The department’s memo outlines a focus on individuals who may have committed crimes after becoming citizens, expanding the scope of the law. Critics argue this move is overly broad, potentially allowing the administration to target a wide range of offenses. Historical cases, such as those involving Nazi collaborators, suggest a complex legal process and the importance of due process.
Read More
The Justice Department is prioritizing the revocation of citizenship for naturalized citizens who commit crimes, expanding the criteria for denaturalization, and granting district attorneys wider discretion in pursuing these cases. This initiative, as stated in a recent memo, designates denaturalization as a top enforcement priority, potentially impacting millions of naturalized citizens. Immigration law experts have expressed serious concerns over the constitutionality of the initiative, particularly the reliance on civil litigation, which may compromise due process rights. This effort builds upon actions taken during previous administrations and is a continuation of actions taken by the Trump administration.
Read More
The separation of powers in the United States government is intended to prevent any one branch from becoming too powerful, with the judicial branch serving as a check on the executive. However, a provision within the proposed “Big Ugly Bill” aims to cripple the judiciary’s ability to fulfill this role by requiring plaintiffs to post bonds to challenge the federal government, effectively barring most individuals and organizations from seeking legal redress. Fortunately, the Senate parliamentarian has ruled that this bond requirement does not comply with the special rules, potentially forcing the bill to be rewritten or face the possibility of a filibuster. The fate of this provision remains uncertain, but its potential impact on limiting the judicial branch’s ability to challenge the executive branch could be severe.
Read More
The Supreme Court issued a ruling on Friday restricting the ability of lower courts to issue “nationwide injunctions,” specifically impacting the enforcement of potential orders, such as those from the Trump administration, that target civil liberties. The majority opinion, while not addressing the constitutionality of the executive order, stated that such injunctions likely exceed the equitable authority granted to federal courts. Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson dissented, with the former strongly criticizing the decision and the latter authoring a separate dissenting opinion. The dissenters felt this ruling provides fuel for attacks on civil liberties.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood