So, let's just start with the "Fuck ICE" because its obligatory at this juncture.
But aren't they allowed to do racial profiling, thanks to Kavanaugh Stops? America has legalized that horrific practice. And while racist slurs ARE deeply unprofessional to be sure, and revealing of the hatred at the core of their actions, - these guys SHOOT people dead in the street, and starve/beat detainees in tiny cells. Also, when doing their "job" correctly, they end up deporting innocent people to countries they've never lived in. They kill and torture at worst, and ruin innocent lives at best. Is America really so ass-backwards someone is going to get some of them in trouble for "no-no words"? Please tell me this is a media problem and someone, somewhere is actually doing something useful, I just don't get to hear about it.
Sorta. That ruling allowed them to use race as a criteria, but not the criteria for stopping someone. So the ACLU is seeking to prove that racial profiling is the primary and often only sorting criteria ICE is using, which is currently not allowed as far as we know (or it will force the courts to just admit that racial profiling is 100% open season now).
They're also calling them tonks, which isn't so much a racial slur but refers to the sound a flashlight makes when they hit someone over the head with it. It's not just that they're no-no words, it's that the language they are using is very much linked to the violence they are also doing.
There are ongoing cases about the Pretti / Good murders also at a minimum, so it's not an either-or situation.
That's not to say that any of this is good or acceptable, mind you. The fact that the country didn't absolutely grind to a halt over all of this is a massive failure, of course.
5 Comments
Englishgrinn@lemmy.ca · 8 pts · 22d
So, let's just start with the "Fuck ICE" because its obligatory at this juncture.
But aren't they allowed to do racial profiling, thanks to Kavanaugh Stops? America has legalized that horrific practice. And while racist slurs ARE deeply unprofessional to be sure, and revealing of the hatred at the core of their actions, - these guys SHOOT people dead in the street, and starve/beat detainees in tiny cells. Also, when doing their "job" correctly, they end up deporting innocent people to countries they've never lived in. They kill and torture at worst, and ruin innocent lives at best. Is America really so ass-backwards someone is going to get some of them in trouble for "no-no words"? Please tell me this is a media problem and someone, somewhere is actually doing something useful, I just don't get to hear about it.
LazyBaby@lemmy.zip · 6 pts · 21d
Sorta. That ruling allowed them to use race as a criteria, but not the criteria for stopping someone. So the ACLU is seeking to prove that racial profiling is the primary and often only sorting criteria ICE is using, which is currently not allowed as far as we know (or it will force the courts to just admit that racial profiling is 100% open season now).
They're also calling them tonks, which isn't so much a racial slur but refers to the sound a flashlight makes when they hit someone over the head with it. It's not just that they're no-no words, it's that the language they are using is very much linked to the violence they are also doing.
There are ongoing cases about the Pretti / Good murders also at a minimum, so it's not an either-or situation.
That's not to say that any of this is good or acceptable, mind you. The fact that the country didn't absolutely grind to a halt over all of this is a massive failure, of course.
RichardDegenne@lemmy.zip · 7 pts · 21d
"Explosive court filing" has gotta be one of the oxymorons of all time.
Zedstrian@sopuli.xyz · 4 pts · 21d
Is it an 'explosive' filing if it's obvious that the kind of people signing up to be ICE agents are racists?
CubitOom@infosec.pub · 2 pts · 21d
As explosive as the diarrhea you'll get from eating Taylor farms lettuce.