followed tags: 6
followed domains: 0
badges given: 0 of 13
member for: 686 days
I'll just add that I think some of this may be indirectly a result of the hatred for Trump. Many want to believe he colluded with Russia, so it's in our interests (even if simple ego protection) to play up the influence of Russian meddling in the election. But this, in turn, could easily make us overestimate its continued influence. That's not to say I think that influence is non-existent, only that we have to be careful, as always, not to believe a story just because we want to.
Having dabbled in immigration law once upon a time, I can say that the system is indeed completely fucked. Back then (like 2014) it seemed less insidious, and more like a lot of people doing the best they could in a broken system (even if the law was kind of jacked up). Now, though, things seem to be getting a lot worse.
- In a statement, ICE officials said their enforcement activities are conducted “with integrity and professionalism” and “in compliance with federal law and agency policy.”
When you can make up the rules, of course you comply with them!
Sadly, many citizens, much less immigrants, don't know the limits of ICE power. Their warrants are not judicial, and are therefore not really worth much. An arrest warrant from a court allows police to search the home where they believe the person to be; an ICE arrest warrant does not.
One of the interesting side-effects to Trump's "deport everyone" approach is, as the article points out, a lot more cases. Which means that fewer people are actually being deported, since the backlog means it takes longer to get a disposition (and they can't be deported without appearing before an immigration judge). But as cynical as I am about the criminal justice system, this shows how much worse it could be without any court oversight.
I'm currently wearing this shirt.
A little of column A, a little of column B?
On a personal level, I expect most people in the KY House were appalled. I think the question, anytime this happens, is whether they're better off politically downplaying it or doing something. They seem to have chosen the latter, which makes some sense: it's a way to change sides in favor of the teachers without having to pretend they haven't been gutting education spending for however long.
Haha, maybe the Lawyer Signal.
As much as I love what Tesla is doing to the auto market (and have been paying attention to the court battle in my home state between them and the auto dealers' association with, as they say, great interest), this was really dumb. I get what they're doing -- trying to scare off the plaintiffs in the inevitable lawsuit, and prevent further fears about the safety of their cars (while also trying to get people to not depend on the autopilot). But this was totally a forced error. As an aside, they should probably rethink what they call the thing.
Yeah, be really careful posting about things like this.
The article says that she hasn't been charged yet, but that doesn't mean she won't be. If she is charged, this post is potentially admissible (if it were found, but you never know). This may not seem like a huge deal, but what if it contradicts her statement to law enforcement in some way? Now it's a credibility thing, and once you've started that fight you've already lost it.
Obviously YMMV, especially in Washington State (I have no more authority to give legal advice there than some random guy on a bus), but something you may want to think about.
I'm hoping that this, combined with the recent spate of teacher walk-outs, will help to undo the anti-union propaganda victories of the last 30 or so years. Granted unions have in many cases done themselves few favors, but still, we've seen what happens to the labor market when they're done away with entirely.
My job is union-represented, and I do think sometimes that the union doesn't know when to pick its battles. But at the same time, many of the perks (such as telework) are the result of our collective bargaining agreement.
That agreement is being renegotiated beginning later this year, with voting/finalizing happening in January. I think that'll be the real test, assuming I haven't found another job by then.
This is a great read, and was much more thoughtful than most.
Probably my only complaint or criticism is that I really dislike this habit of assuming an author's personality or values based on their work. I mean, it sounds like in Hughes' case it may have been justified (and Molly Ringwald is certainly in a better position than most to say so), but I think we're generally too quick to equate portrayal with lionization.