Yves here. While it is an open question as to whether litigation to stop ICE violence and flagrant disregard for long-standing policing practices, IMHO the presumption that the Supreme Court would back Trump is not a given. Supreme Courts regularly skew their rulings in favor of evolving public sentiment. It has hit the point that even GOP members see Trump as having gone too far, witness Senator Tom Tillis fiercely criticizing Trump over his criminal investigation of Powell and the large number of GOP Congresscritters who have decided not to seek re-election. And even before the ICE savagery, polls found considerable opposition to Trump defiance of court rulings.
Now admittedly this is all moot if Trump manages to gin up a pretext for declaring martial law. But reports that the Pentagon is telling Trump “no” or at “not now” over his Greenland adventurism and his eagerness to attack Iran say that, perversely, our protection from Trump may come via a soft military coup, in the form of it not executing his orders. This happened before, as Douglas Macgregor recounted long form. Trump ordered the withdrawal from Afghanistan at the very end of Trump 1.0 and went through all the proper forms, but the armed services ignored him.
By Jessica Corbett, a staff writer at Common Dreams. Originally published at Common Dreams
Illinois and Minnesota, along with targeted cities in both states, filed a pair of federal lawsuits on Monday in hopes of ending deadly operations by President Donald Trump administration’s intended to hunt down and deport immigrants.
Trump has sent thousands of US Department of Homeland Security agents—including from Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE)—to the Twin Cities in recent days for an operation that resulted in the death of Renee Good, a US citizen and mother fatally shot by a federal officer in Minneapolis.
Amid the mounting violence by federal agents in Minnesota and the Trump administration’s related propaganda—which have fueled protests across the country—the state’s Democratic attorney general, Keith Ellison, plus the cities of Minneapolis and Saint Paul, took aim at DHS, CBP, ICE, and various agency leaders in a US district court.
“Defendants claim this unprecedented surge of immigration agents is necessary to fight fraud,” says the complaint, filed in the District of Minnesota. “In reality, the massive deployment of armed agents to Minnesota bears no connection to that stated objective and instead reflects an alarming escalation of the Trump administration’s retaliatory actions towards the state.”
In a Monday statement, Ellison stressed that “the unlawful deployment of thousands of armed, masked, and poorly trained federal agents is hurting Minnesota.”
“People are being racially profiled, harassed, terrorized, and assaulted,” he noted. “Schools have gone into lockdown. Businesses have been forced to close. Minnesota police are spending countless hours dealing with the chaos ICE is causing. This federal invasion of the Twin Cities has to stop, so today I am suing DHS to bring it to an end.”
As footage of an ICE officer shooting Good began to circulate online last week, Democratic Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey publicly told the agency to “get the fuck out” of his city. On Monday, he added that “when federal actions undermine public safety, harm our neighbors, and violate constitutional rights, we have a responsibility to act. That’s exactly what we’re doing today.”
Trump’s “Operation Metro Surge” in Minnesota this year followed the September launch of “Operation Midway Blitz” in Illinois, which targeted Chicago and its suburbs—where immigration agents have also shot multiple people in recent months, including one fatally.
“Border Patrol agents and ICE officers have acted as occupiers rather than officers of the law,” Democratic Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul declared Monday. “They randomly, and often violently, question residents. Without warrants or probable cause, they brutally detain citizens and noncitizens alike.”
“They use tear gas and other chemical weapons against bystanders, injuring dozens, including children, the elderly, and local police officers,” he continued. “I filed this lawsuit to stand up for the safety of the people of Illinois and the sovereignty of our state.”
The 103-page suit, filed in the Northern District of Illinois, followed another from the state and city of Chicago that blocked Trump’s attempt to deploy the National Guard in the area, as he had done in Los Angeles, California and Washington, DC. At the end of last month, the president announced troops would leave Chicago, LA, and Portland, Oregon, but also said that “we will come back.”
Democratic Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker—a frequent critic of the president—said Monday that “Illinois is once again taking Donald Trump to court to hold his administration accountable for their unlawful tactics, unnecessary escalations, and flagrant abuses of power.”
Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson emphasized that “these actions weren’t just unlawful; they were cruel, needlessly inflicting fear and harm on our communities.”
“My administration will forcefully protect our residents’ rights and hold anyone accountable who abuses their power,” Johnson pledged. “Nobody is above the law. This lawsuit is about ensuring there is accountability for the lawless actions of the Trump administration and justice for the Chicagoans who have been wronged.”
In statements to multiple media outlets, DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin made clear that the Trump administration plans to fight back against both states’ moves. She called the Illinois filing “a baseless lawsuit,” and saidof the Minnesota case, “We have the Constitution on our side on this, and we look forward to proving that in court.”
Meanwhile, critics of the Trump administration, and particularly its immigration operations, welcomed the new suits.
Congresswoman Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.), a daughter of immigrants, wrote in a social media post about the suit in her state that “DHS’s terror force is the greatest threat to our safety. Their militarized invasion of our cities puts us all at risk. They need to be defunded. They need to be held accountable. In the streets, in Congress, and in courts, we will fight to protect our communities, and we will win.”
It is important to note that the lawsuit by the state of Illinois is a civil lawsuit, and its many pleas for relief at the end of the filing don’t call for jail sentences. I suppose that this lawsuit is the best that can be done under the circumstances: Yet the only way to end such outrages against the citizenry, which have included physical abuse, kidnapping, entering courthouses to make arrests, and impersonation of police officers (check out the mix-and-match gear), is to put people in jail.
At a minimum, to make things serious, some congresscritters are going to have to draw up articles of impeachment for Kristi Noem.
I am not persuaded that the Supreme Court of the United States can be trusted to protect the rights of the people (pace, Yves Smith and the head note). What I am seeing in various videos is reminiscent of the slavecatchers and the Fugitive Slave Act of the 1850s. Little did I know of the act from 1793. Quite a U.S. tradition, slavery and abuse of slaves:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fugitive_slave_laws_in_the_United_States#Civil_War-era_legal_status_of_fugitive_slaves
Recall that the response of the Supremes was the Dred Scott decision.
I note, too, that Justice Roberts doesn’t seem to care much about the currently disastrous reputation of the Court. But then this Court consists of him and a bunch of other mediocrities who like to junket with their conflict-of-interest pals.
I mention the fugitive slave acts also because I am detecting the continuing legacy of slavery in U.S. culture. Many of the people recently migrating to the U S of A are economic refugees. Often, they come from countries ruined by U.S. policies. And, how convenient!, they tend to be a docile labor force, doing those “jobs that Americans don’t want to do” [™}. Round ‘em up!
[I won’t mention refugees and asylum seekers, who are treated shabbily in the U.S. of A. but are a separate class of immigrants.]
Imagine a so-called democracy where the people are unable to stop this, have no recourse to prevent armed takeover and occupation from within. I wonder if future generations might see a need to update the constitution and what checks and balances they might add by way of preventing this happening again. That is, assuming the country somehow escapes this authoritarian takeover, which seems increasingly unlikely.
Not only do we have the historical example in Germany of a democracy which fell to similar rule, now we’ll also have the example of Israel and the US.
The Trump administration proves that there are many needed amendments to the Constitution. (also, many needed prosecutions)
I don’t see the national level Democrats having the will to do that work.
Imagine states refusing to enforce federal law and actively encouraging their residents to disrupt federal law enforcement from enforcing federal law (reminiscent of the 1960s). then imagine the ones who lost the last set of elections, at every federal level, complaining that the top election issue of the winning candidates being addressed is somehow not democracy at work. the people voted for mass deportations. and overwhelmingly want voter ID laws. why the resistance to what the voters want? what happened to mass immigration being a tool of the corporations to suppress wages of the lower and middle class?
The MN Attorney General and Hennepin County Attorney need to aggressively prosecute the murderer of Good. If any random Minnesota resident did what he did, that person would quickly be arrested and indicted, leaving it to the citizen jury to decide guilt. Aggressive prosecutions against all ICE thugs would have a chilling affect on their violence.
Unfortunately it wasn’t just some rando MN resident – it was someone with a badge. The color of law. And the federal system isn’t going to let the locals start prosecuting federal agents while acting in their law enforcement capacity.
Now, should the feds charge that officer? Not gonna happen under this administration.
The federal system has jurisdiction over federal law violations while the state has jurisdiction over state law violations.
While the FBI has shut MN out of the fed investigation, the state (MN Attorney General and Hennepin County Attorney) have opened their own investigation. The result of their investigation will go to the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA), which investigates officer-involved shootings in Minnesota. After that, the case file will be sent to the county attorney’s office which will decide whether to charge the agent.
While county attorneys are reluctant to bring charges against law enforcement officers, they did prosecute and convict the police officers involved in the George Floyd murder. Given the amount of public outrage to this shooting and other ICE violence, the county attorney will be pressured to take this case to trial.
I think that agent should turn himself into the state on condition he gets a plea deal to serve time in a country club penitentiary. That seems the best to save his neck, he will have a target on his back anywhere else. A pardon would do him no good.
ICE-man’s in hiding, facilitated by ICE Barbie.
Civil suits are well and good, but Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty, with the help of MN Attorney General Keith Ellison, needs to convene a grand jury, indict, and seek an arrest warrant.
Then maybe go after ICE Barbie as an Accessory After the Fact…
Exactly this. If they’re serious, PROSECUTE
I’ve been saying this for months, and Will said something similar on Chapo last week:
If you want me to vote Democrat, give me a candidate who promises to investigate and prosecute people in the current administration. Otherwise, there’s no point in that party having control.
The original Fugitive Slave Act presumed cooperation from state officials. The failure of northern states to participate led to complaints from the slave states and agitation for a new, more powerful act. That act allowed for out of state assistance to the US Marshal and federal courts to enforce the act (in some respects similar to how ICE is being used today).
Push back from northern states led to the passage of state “personal liberty” laws, much like “sanctuary cities”.
In Wisconsin this led to a legal battle between the Wis Supreme Court and US Supreme Court as In Re: Booth (3 Wis 1 1854) decision that was appealed as Abelman v. Booth (62 U.S. 514 1859). Booth had been arrested by the US Marshal for district of Wisconsin for agitating for the escape of a former slave, Glover, from federal custody. (He is quoted as riding through the streets calling out ““Freemen! To the rescue! Slave catchers are in our midst! Be at the courthouse at 2:00!”) (sounds familiar). The Wisconsin courts granted a writ of habeas corpus and the matter was argued in the state supreme court, with an opinion declaring the 1850 act unconstitutional.
It went to the US Supreme Court which overturned the decision (Taney writing the opinion) but the Wisconsin courts never took notice of that decision. Booth was eventually arrested again and the battle continued, until Pres Buchanan eventually pardoned him in Mar 1861 the day before Lincoln’s inauguration.
I wonder if anyone will notice that the Fugitive Slave Act likely pushed the civil war ahead by years, if not decades, as well as creating abolitionists out of racists. Plenty of Americans were eager to ignore the issue of slavery, but when legalized slave raids became normal, it changed the conversation from “would you want your daughter to marry one of them?” to “why are armed gangs kidnapping men, women, and children off the street to be sold merely on those same kidnappers’ words?”
It is easy to ignore something until someone jams your face into it.
We here in South Carolina await the arrival of ICE which will turn even ruby red SC against our doofus in chief. After all what will our now dominant real estate interests do without Mexican immigrants to build all their new houses?
Ralph Nader wrote a book called Only the Rich Can Save Us which was mistaken, because while they may care nothing about us they do care about saving themselves. As Donald lashes out against Exxon, generals and admirals who defy his will and others who resist his personality cult the above suggestion that revolt is brewing is spot on–IMO.
I think this is an important point. I do believe that Establishment elites fear Trump and would like to get rid of him; as you say, this is not because they care about “the people,” but because they fear Trump will bring the whole House crashing down. What has stopped most of them, especially Republican politicos, is fear of Trump’s popularity among the MAGA masses. This is why the current unrest on the Right stirred up by people like Tucker Carlson or Marjorie Taylor Greene is so important. If the Powers that Be sense that Trump has lost his one “trump” card – popular support – then perhaps they can successfully take him out this time.
I do think there are some powerful people who are backing Trump *because* of his willingness to do the unthinkable – Zionist billionaires and Peter Thiel come to mind. But I don’t think most of the Establishment want to blow up everything.
I don’t know if ICE operations in SC would do much to change the political slant of the state… ICE has apparently been operating in TX for a while just fine.
The only protests or organized opposition to it – that I’ve heard of at least – started because of the Renee Good murder.
The authoritarian worshipping instinct is powerful and difficult to overcome; a lot of red staters are perfectly happy with what’s going on.
That would make sense though, MAGAts only get pissed when white people are killed. If only she wasn’t gay, many more would have been upset.
I was being snarky of course. Now that Lindsey is Trump’s fulltime bff SC is probably the last state to experience a crackdown. I believe ICE has been in North Carolina and the Charlotte area but I haven’t been following it.
IIRC, SC was the original American police state
He will never send ICE to red states. The point of ICE is not to deport immigrants. It is to fuck with blue states. My take anyway.
True, it is unclear if the Supreme’s will attempt to reassert constitutional controls – it is also unclear if they can – on Tariffs, Trump indicates he will not listen to their opinion, versus relabeling tariffs in name, but maintaining the substance. Will a Republican Congress impeach to implement the Supremes ruling? The question drives the answer.
No charges against the murderer of Renee Good in Minnesota yet, and I don’t anticipate there will be. As such, all this is just more grandstanding from the blue team. Obama set the tone in 2009 when he said we will look forward, not backward. No prosecutions then, no prosecutions now. The only accountability for any of these criminals will be done in the manner Luigi allegedly did. If you haven’t figured this out by now I don’t know what to tell you.
Looks like weak tea:
the following relief:
a. Absent express Congressional authorization, enjoin Defendant CBP from
conducting civil immigration enforcement in Illinois;
b. Declare that the Roving Patrol, Biometric Scanning, Warrantless Arrest, Tear Gas,
Arbitrary Enforcement, Conceal Plates, and Private Trespass policies violate the
APA as set forth above;
c. Declare that Defendants have violated the Tenth Amendment to the United States
Constitution as set forth above;
d. Vacate the Roving Patrol, Biometric Scanning, Warrantless Arrest, Tear Gas,
Arbitrary Enforcement, Conceal Plates, and Private Trespass policies;
e. Enjoin Defendants from implementing or enforcing the Roving Patrol, Biometric
Scanning, Warrantless Arrest, Tear Gas, Arbitrary Enforcement, Conceal Plates,
and Private Trespass policies, or engaging in such conduct that comprises the
policies;
f. Award Plaintiffs their reasonable fees, costs and expenses, including attorneys’
fees, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2412; and
98
g. Award any such additional relief as this Court may deem just and proper
One thing that has struck me is how the Bat Signal seems to have gone out that if you ever want to be considered a Republican or a “conservative” again, you must back this killing. Saager Enjeti looked like he was broadcasting from the Hanoi Hilton when he “debated” Krystal Ball about this. Megyn Kelly, on the other hand, is letting her fascist flag fly enthusiastically.
It’s very appropriate to be talking about Dred Scott and the lead up to the Civil War. We seem to be consolidating into two sides who are now going to contest for control of the streets, at least in so-called Blue cities. The people of Minneapolis are putting up quite a brave defense so far. Will Walsh take the heat off them and deploy the Minnesota National Guard? Then we’re at Fort Sumter.
Meanwhile, Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries hide in some Capitol broom closet, refusing to demand the defunding of ICE before upping the debt ceiling. For Chuck, I’d guess the one and only salient issue is that he and Trump are on the same Israel First page. The same is probably true for Jeffries. I’m noting also that the Neocons are starting to be less harsh on Trump as well.
We’re basically back to Mississippi in 1964 or Chicago in 1968 or Kent and Jackson State in 1970. Back then, the Right’s strategy, as summarized by Nixon and Haldeman, was “kill a few.” This time it may soon be “kill a bunch.”
Surely, Nemesis has not disappeared from the cosmos. Trump appears to be at the height of his hubris personally, so anytime you like to appear, Ms. Nemesis.
We saw the ‘Color Revolution’ stratagem brought home to the US in recent years, we shouldn’t be surprised to see counterinsurgency tactics. At least they are wearing uniforms. How long before the Salvador option is openly discussed?