Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Good quote, but at this point its been said before and I think its time to move on to the cancel culture in Portland, for example.
|
I posted about Portland, suggesting that maybe it's not quite as apocalyptic as everyone else seems to think, so let me expand on that. Three related things are happening with the DHS presence.
(1) You have federal authorities ignoring state and local authorities to pick their own (confrontational) policing strategy. Since the current administration likes to pursue its own maximalist policies and is not restrained by what anyone else thinks, there's really nothing to stop them other than the November election. Acting in an unrestrained manner has really become an end in itself for them. Given the usually limited nature of federal jurisdiction in policing, it would not matter so much, except that...
(2) DHS has ludicrously expanded its own jurisdiction to go after any protest in Portland instead of protecting federal buildings. This will not stand up in the courts if and when it gets tested, as if they try to prosecute anyone, which it doesn't appear the local U.S. Attorney is particularly interested in doing, as they must know, which is why...
(3) DHS doesn't seem to be arresting anyone because they want to keep the federal courts uninvolved for as long as possible, so they essentially are exploiting the lattitude that law enforcement generally has to detain people for a short time before letting them go. Other police do this all the time at political protests, and there doesn't really seem to be a good way to curb this. If they hold people too long, then they have a habeas problem, and the point is to own the street in the moment, not to put people away indefinitely. You don't usually see the feds doing this because of (1) and (2), but it doesn't seem any less problematic than when, say, NYPD does it.
