Category Archives: Actions

Why Can’t ICE Just…

Posted on by
Reply

Behave? Disappear? Wear body cams? Take off the masks? Focus on actual criminals? Stay away from schools? 

And while we’re at it, why can’t the administration stop with the lying after agents kill a protester? I’m tempted to order a sweatshirt that reads “Domestic Terrorist” to display solidarity with protesters. Protesters with whistles and cameras are not domestic terrorists. Period.

That said, what do you think of the whistle strategy? This is a serious question. They agitate me. Yes, I’m sensitive to sounds, but when I watch the videos of protesters whistling, I tense up. I wonder what the whistling does to law enforcement. Does it make them edgier than they would otherwise be? More trigger happy? 

Most city cops in the US are trained in de-escalation tactics, that is, if protesters and targets are of a mind to de-escalate. They could help in some of the deportation efforts except where local jurisdictions have sanctuary policies. Sanctuary policies vary, but in general, they prohibit local law enforcement from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement actions. So, are these sanctuary policies wise? 

I get why they were enacted. Sanctuary provisions enable undocumented aliens to seek help if they are victims of crime. That’s important. Everyone who is a victim of a crime should be able to talk to police without fear that their immigration status will be used against them. But if local laws protect undocumented people who’ve been convicted of crimes, I’m less enthusiastic. Aren’t these the people who need to be deported? Is there a useful middle ground? 

I know I’m a wimp. I balked at “Defund the Police,” I can’t go all the way with trans activists: I think black lives matter, but I also think all lives matter, I support the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state, but I’d support a Palestinian state if the Palestinians would support the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state. 

Regarding immigration, I don’t see the need to be brutal in enforcing deportation of people who crossed the border in more lenient times. If people requested asylum, they have a right to plead their case. If we need more immigration judges to process an unusual number of applicants, then I’d rather add more judges than ICE agents. We will need young, healthy immigrants in the future. If someone survives the walk across the border, perhaps they’re healthy enough to be useful to us. That said, I’m fine with deporting criminals and policing our border as long as there is a realistic possibility of coming here legally. 

I’m torn because I want “reasonable” border policies. Still, Renee Good and Alex Pretti did not need to die. The vision of thugs in law enforcement uniforms is so abhorrent to me, that I just might need to join a protest in the near future. 

I’ll keep you posted. 

The Complex Landscape of Immigration Protests

Posted on by
Reply

Update: My apologies to Alex Pretti for misspelling his name In the first edition of this post. Also and apology to ICE for naming them as the killer of Pretti. I later learned it was CBP *Customs and Border Patrol” that killed Pretti. Both wear masks. Neither wear body cams. GP

I got dressed this morning in order to sit in on the informal chat group that meets here daily to catch up on whatever’s going on. When I arrived today, politics was on the menu (something generally avoided), and steam was rising – and not just from the coffee cups. Olympia’s resisters would like to be in the news just like the big guys: Minneapolis this week, but Seattle at times, and other places occasionally. But we are too small to get noticed. Doesn’t stop folks from trying, however.

The steam today arose because our most committed resister (Resister A) was scolding a sympathizer for not showing up in person to yesterday’s rally. In turn, a fellow rally attendant (Resister B) was scolding Resister A for trying to shame a person into attending the rallies. Her position was that shame wasn’t useful when trying to gather steam for the cause. Well, I’ll leave them to work that out. 

The basic issue for now, what to do about ICE, is serious. Alex Pretti and Renee Good did not need to die. We have a right to protest. Neither Alex nor Renee was a threat to an agent. Nuisance, yes, but threat, no. So the question is this: Can non-violent action, such as whistling and photographing ICE actions bring about the change we seek?

Sadly, we have no one near the stature of Martin Luther King, Jr. to lead us today. Furthermore, the goals of current protests are murkier than the civil rights protests of the 50s and 60s. Some want ICE abolished; others want ICE to just be nicer, i.e. take off the masks, wear identification, stay away from children and workers, only go after actual criminals while letting other immigrants work their way through the system. And even when going after criminals, afford due process for all. I don’t know for sure, but I suspect that most of the whistling protesters today are true open borders aficionados, while sympathizers who are not on the streets want orderly immigration with effective screening of who’s coming in. ICE supporters most likely want the border closed with few permitted to enter. (I could be wrong.)

As I search for leaders, no person or organization stands out today. We have Indivisible and, well, Indivisible. Christians have Undivided, and yes, there are others, but not really as far as national work is concerned. (Prove me wrong, please!) The problem with Indivisible from my perspective, is that it’s all over the place regarding issues. It doesn’t want to leave anyone out. So if I put on my winter attire and attend a protest, I could be standing next to someone who’s working against issues that I really care about. In fact, I would definitely be standing next to someone who’s working against things I care about. So I’m not there. 

Frankly, I don’t quite get the name “Indivisible.” Of course we’re divided. Democracy assumes division. The point of democracy is to resolve differences without violence. Not sure what name I would have selected, but probably something other than Indivisible. I love that Indivisible claims to be committed to nonviolence, that “Indivisible prohibits carrying or bringing any weapon to an Indivisible event, whether or not the person is licensed to carry a firearm or weapon.” Source: Indivisible.org But the whistling protests in Minneapolis are not officially sponsored by Indivisible. So Alex Prettii, who had a legitimate concealed carry permit for his weapon, which was, indeed, concealed, might just be alive today if he had followed Indivisible guidelines and left his weapon at home. We’ll never know, but I do wonder what he was thinking he would do with his weapon in the face of multiple agents with bigger weapons than his. 

So: what’s a concerned citizen like me to do? At this point, I am on the brink of joining a protest that specifically targets ICE. I really, really want ICE to behave. If they can’t behave like a well trained law enforcement agency that gets rid of the masks, identifies individual agents, stays away from schools, leaves children and protesters alone, and focuses only on actual criminals (not just people who come here outside of proper procedures), then do we really need them? The border is secure, as Kristi Noem frequently reminds us. Let’s let whatever undocumented immigrants we have who have applied for asylum, overstayed a visa, or are basically working and minding their own business work through the system using their due process rights to try to become legal residents. IMHO.

Your thoughts?

Get Me Out of the Doldrums!

Posted on by
Reply

Waiting, waiting, waiting. Activity occurs, but nothing is resolved. I have this wretched feeling of impending doom, but doom is never finalized. I could be a sailboat near the equator waiting for a wind strong enough to get me out of the doldrums in one direction or the other. Please, can we just move somewhere, anywhere, let’s get this settled. Either the US is finished or we can salvage our Constitution and use it to make some needed changes. 

Our Constitution has been amended and, theoretically, could be amended again. Some simple tweaks are being proposed, and I’m of the opinion that only very simple tweaks could possibly survive the ratification process. One tweak that I support has been proposed by David French. He’s a conservative NYT columnist. He’s also a graduate of Harvard Law and host with Sarah Isgur of the popular “Advisory Opinion” legal podcast sponsored by The Dispatch, a libertarian media organization. Despite my reservations about the NYT, I often learn things by reading and listening to French. 

Please read French’s column here (NYT) or this Daily KOS article here explaining his reasoning for this proposal. Essentially he wants to reinforce the original expectation that Congress should be the pre-eminent brach of government. He suggests replacing the first sentence of Article II in order to accomplish this. “Instead of declaring, ‘The executive power shall be vested in a president of the United States of America,’ it should read, ‘A president of the United States of America shall execute laws passed by Congress.’” There. That’s it. 

No more would a president be able to declare that he “can do anything he wants.” Yes, it’s hard to imagine that any tweak of the Constitution could address the myriad issues of our day, but I have to agree with French that clarifying the supremacy of Congress over the Executive Branch would be a welcome attempt to rebalance things. “No Kings!” No, I don’t love the current Congress, but perhaps if there was more clarity about the importance of their role in the great scheme of things, a few of them might get a spine. 

I think such an amendment could shake things up enough to generate some activity in Congress which is moribund currently. And despite the many attempts to secure a permanent majority, it might some day be possible to elect people willing to think and act – as opposed to just grandstanding – once they get to DC. In any event we wouldn’t have a king. 

Your thoughts?