A reminder about your rights. If the government can declare you to have an attribute that negates your rights, then you have no rights.
In laymen’s terms, if ICE arrests you and fast deports you, whose going to stop them? Okay but you get to a consulate in the foreign country and get back home. When you come out of your lawyer’s office (because you’re suing ICE), ICE arrests you again, this time as a criminal illegal alien because you came back in. They tell no one they have you, they tell no one where you are. You have no rights according to them. You are sent to an El Salvadoran prison in contravention of a court order not to deport you.
These are all things that have happened separately. We’ve accidently deported Americans. We’ve deported Americans on purpose. (Trump sent American kids away so he could deport their parents too) We’ve deported someone to an El Salvadoran prison in contravention of a court order.
If they don’t have rights, then neither do you because the government can just declare you a member of that group and as long as the guys with guns maintain that fiction, nobody can stop them.
This is also why the attacks on identification documentation for transgender people should concern everyone. We used to consider ex post facto laws unconstitutional - even things like sex registry acts have been historically controversial because they were adding a punishment that had not been previously ordained.
I spent $5500 that I could not afford (as in, I ended up having to do sex work to pay for it) - to get my “irreversible and permanent” surgery that the state I lived in said would qualify to have my legal sex changed. Like, I would have preferred to wait until I was in a more financially stable situation or might not have even bothered because I didn’t even really need to bind to pass - but the drivers license with an “F” is a problem once you have a full beard.
I followed their rules, I played their games. And now they get to say, nope, doesn’t count anymore. That’s not how the law is supposed to work.
I’ve gotten the excuse to read both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution itself, out loud, with teenagers several times recently. Jefferson was a hypocrite and fuckwit that made money off of the back of child labor and raped the women he owned, but those words do have meaning. Any government calling itself the US that does not heed those words is not legitimate.
Yeah legitimacy is a thing so many people don’t understand. And it’s why they want to cloak their actions on official language and procedure. We would riot if they just disappeared people. So they make it seem like they aren’t just doing that.
A reminder about your rights. If the government can declare you to have an attribute that negates your rights, then you have no rights.
Any time someone claims that some group of people should have no/reduced due process, I respond essentially the same way: “If you believe that $GROUP shouldn’t have due process then you are a $GROUP_MEMBER. Prove you’re not without any due process.” Before this year, it was mostly people accused of sexual assault, but illegal immigrants are the new target of choice as people who allegedly don’t deserve due process rights.
Even though being in the country undocumented is a civil offense, like speeding or something. Still, using language alone, they made this the one offense that supposedly makes a person be “illegal” — textbook dehumanization btw.
So it’s legally on par with speeding, factually less dangerous than speeding, but somehow it’s seen as the worst “crime” in the country, so bad that they argue it warrants suspending due process like you’re at war or something. Manufactured delusion.
they made this the one offense that makes a person be “illegal”
It doesn’t make the person be illegal, but we nounify crimes to describe people who have committed said crime all the time.
The whole point of the “undocumented worker” language is to make it sound like someone who misplaced some paperwork, rather than someone who violated immigration law.
I mean, no one gets mad when you use the more common terms to describe an undocumented procurement specialist, an adverse euthanasia specialist or an unauthorized sexual partner. Despite those terms describing the person as being their violation of law.
For sure. I just meant that they intentionally and repeatedly use this wording to obscure the fact that undocumented status isn’t that big a problem (it doesn’t hurt anyone except maybe the undocumented person), as well as to reinforce the idea on a subconscious level that they’re somehow dangerous criminals.
A reminder about your rights. If the government can declare you to have an attribute that negates your rights, then you have no rights.
In laymen’s terms, if ICE arrests you and fast deports you, whose going to stop them? Okay but you get to a consulate in the foreign country and get back home. When you come out of your lawyer’s office (because you’re suing ICE), ICE arrests you again, this time as a criminal illegal alien because you came back in. They tell no one they have you, they tell no one where you are. You have no rights according to them. You are sent to an El Salvadoran prison in contravention of a court order not to deport you.
These are all things that have happened separately. We’ve accidently deported Americans. We’ve deported Americans on purpose. (Trump sent American kids away so he could deport their parents too) We’ve deported someone to an El Salvadoran prison in contravention of a court order.
If they don’t have rights, then neither do you because the government can just declare you a member of that group and as long as the guys with guns maintain that fiction, nobody can stop them.
This is also why the attacks on identification documentation for transgender people should concern everyone. We used to consider ex post facto laws unconstitutional - even things like sex registry acts have been historically controversial because they were adding a punishment that had not been previously ordained.
I spent $5500 that I could not afford (as in, I ended up having to do sex work to pay for it) - to get my “irreversible and permanent” surgery that the state I lived in said would qualify to have my legal sex changed. Like, I would have preferred to wait until I was in a more financially stable situation or might not have even bothered because I didn’t even really need to bind to pass - but the drivers license with an “F” is a problem once you have a full beard.
I followed their rules, I played their games. And now they get to say, nope, doesn’t count anymore. That’s not how the law is supposed to work.
I’m so sorry, I don’t think we live in a country subject to rule of law anymore though.
I’ve gotten the excuse to read both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution itself, out loud, with teenagers several times recently. Jefferson was a hypocrite and fuckwit that made money off of the back of child labor and raped the women he owned, but those words do have meaning. Any government calling itself the US that does not heed those words is not legitimate.
Yeah legitimacy is a thing so many people don’t understand. And it’s why they want to cloak their actions on official language and procedure. We would riot if they just disappeared people. So they make it seem like they aren’t just doing that.
Any time someone claims that some group of people should have no/reduced due process, I respond essentially the same way: “If you believe that $GROUP shouldn’t have due process then you are a $GROUP_MEMBER. Prove you’re not without any due process.” Before this year, it was mostly people accused of sexual assault, but illegal immigrants are the new target of choice as people who allegedly don’t deserve due process rights.
Even though being in the country undocumented is a civil offense, like speeding or something. Still, using language alone, they made this the one offense that supposedly makes a person be “illegal” — textbook dehumanization btw.
So it’s legally on par with speeding, factually less dangerous than speeding, but somehow it’s seen as the worst “crime” in the country, so bad that they argue it warrants suspending due process like you’re at war or something. Manufactured delusion.
It doesn’t make the person be illegal, but we nounify crimes to describe people who have committed said crime all the time.
The whole point of the “undocumented worker” language is to make it sound like someone who misplaced some paperwork, rather than someone who violated immigration law.
I mean, no one gets mad when you use the more common terms to describe an undocumented procurement specialist, an adverse euthanasia specialist or an unauthorized sexual partner. Despite those terms describing the person as being their violation of law.
For sure. I just meant that they intentionally and repeatedly use this wording to obscure the fact that undocumented status isn’t that big a problem (it doesn’t hurt anyone except maybe the undocumented person), as well as to reinforce the idea on a subconscious level that they’re somehow dangerous criminals.
…PHP developer?