[account42]

> How does "tracking ICE" _prevent_ the enforcement of the law? Your views on the first amendment suddenly became quite narrow.

Because the whole point of tracking ICE is to help people dodge them. It's absurd that people cry foul when the government goes after people actively opposing the rule of law.

[fc417fc802]

> It's absurd that people cry foul when the government goes after people actively opposing the rule of law.

I expect the vast majority of government abuses in recent history the world over have to at least some degree followed the law according to those carrying out the acts. Thus it is almost to be expected that as a situation escalates those crying foul might occasionally find themselves opposing the rule of law as described by those in power.

To state it plainly, not all "rule of law" is subjectively equal.

[VBprogrammer]

Law enforcement only works when the people have trust in those doing the enforcement.

ICE have lost the trust of a significant portion of the people in Minnesota because they are using unreasonable force, eroding constitutionally protected rights and behaving with impunity.

They are, in reality, just conducting a politically motivated campaign of harassment. If they truly wanted to deport as many people as possible they'd start with border states like Florida and Texas, places with 20x more undocumented immigrants.

[NickC25]

Or, get this - they'd go after the people who employ illegal immigrants en masse in those states.

Illegal immigrants aren't a thing at any meaningful scale if there aren't people willing to hire them.

But since a lot of those businesses that hire illegally or "look the other way" are BIG republican donors in deep red states....we can't do anything about it.

We should have made e-verify the federal minimum standard for ALL employment as far back as 1985. We had the tech and the ability.

Y'all honestly think Donald Trump hires blue-blooded WASPs to mow the lawns at his golf courses?

[quickthrowman]

> Or, get this - they'd go after the people who employ illegal immigrants en masse in those states.

This is not economically feasible, the cost of food would double or more. They know that and I know that. That’s why they aren’t actually targeting illegal immigrants, America’s dirty secret is that we need them to keep prices low on certain things.

Good luck finding Americans that will pick strawberries or work in a meatpacking plant for $12-16/hr

[NickC25]

We have things called subsidies for that reason. Agribusiness companies of all sizes including megacorps get tons of money in subsides for this sort of situation. Unfortunately, those subsidies go towards purchasing lobbyists, growing profit margins, and paying executives instead of lowering food costs to Americans.

And yes, it absolutely is feasible, and we all know it. It's just if it happened, some very wealthy and influential people would lose a bit of money and influence - we can't have that now can we?

[cogman10]

> Because the whole point of tracking ICE is to help people dodge them.

Seems completely reasonable given ICE is murdering, arresting, and deporting citizens and legal residents.

The government wronging 1 person to rightfully enforce the law on 10 is unacceptable.

[AppleAtCha]

IANAL but I don't think it's so cut and dried that creating a crowdsourced map of publicly visible ice operations is illegal. Yes such a map could be used by illegal immigrants to avoid detention. It could also be used by law abiding citizens that want to avoid the hubbub these operations cause or by legal us citizens that don't wanna be targeted just for being in the neighborhood. It seems like a decent lawyer could make a case that publishing the location of an ice operation is not the same as acting with intent to interfere with the operation.

[direwolf20]

Which law makes it illegal to track ICE? If there isn't a law against it, but you think the government should arrest people for it anyway, then you don't support rule of law.

[VBprogrammer]

The obvious retort is "obstruction". Of course it doesn't hold up to scrutiny because courts have consistently held that obstruction has to be a physical act. Simply being nearby, filming or calling them names doesn't count.

[mothballed]

Is kicking out tail lights and spitting at agents obstruction?[] Because he definitely appears to have done that about a week before his death. Though that doesn't merit death.

[] https://youtu.be/p2TRbFmutrw?t=1023

[defrost]

I scrolled back a little.

There are a number of local citizens upset at two out of state vehicles blocking off a road while (?) executing warrentless invasions of homes in the community (?)

What is the appropriate action when Federal over reach is so blatent and unaddressed?

It's not as if people there are angry at ICE / DHS for absolutely no reason whatsoever.

[mothballed]

Two things can simultaneously be true. That the legal criteria of obstruction have been reached, and also that the Federal apparatus routinely oversteps both the constitutional and the most essential natural rights.

Just know the King interprets spitting and kicking tail lights as a 'shot at the King.' Pretti took his shot at the King, with his cosmetic accessory piece gun tucked in his waistband, at about 4 out of 100. And expected the King to meet him with something other than 100 or 0. In that light, I'll concede of the possibility he was morally right, but I also think he was a fool. If his goal all along was to kneel, let himself be disarmed, then quietly accept his execution like a bitch -- what did he even get out of it? He handed the pro-regime a major propaganda victory and the anti-regime nothing at best.

[defrost]

Uhh, right, .... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWu7d5YqV9k

> He handed the pro-regime a major propaganda victory and the anti-regime nothing at best.

That's not even remotely true - currently the MAGA pro-Trump crowd is cleaving on gun rights .. the big lie about the need for ICE / DHS is unravelling and now Republican support for ICE is dropping.

[account42]

> What is the appropriate action when Federal over reach is so blatent and unaddressed?

In a democracy? Voting, campaigning, running for office. Defintiely not vigilantism - or other people will also get to ignore laws that you like.

[defrost]

> Defintiely not vigilantism

So, free speech, licenced carry, local community resisting unlawful warrents, etc are all ok?

Voting, in the USofA, is ineffectual - it takes years to make change and the choices are essentially shite .. barely a Democracy, more a Republican Autocracy by design.

Of interest:

  On Monday, Judge Patrick J. Schiltz of the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, appointed by President George W. Bush, suggested his patience with ICE had run out. After officials apparently ignored his order to permit a detainee to have a bond hearing or release him, he ordered Todd Lyons, the acting director of ICE, to appear in court on Friday to explain why he wasn’t in contempt of court. On Tuesday, the government released the detainee.

  Today Schiltz canceled the Friday hearing but went on to rake ICE over the coals. He identified “96 court orders that ICE has violated in 74 cases” and commented, “The extent of ICE’s noncompliance is almost certainly substantially understated.”

  “This list should give pause to anyone—no matter his or her political beliefs—who cares about the rule of law. ICE has likely violated more court orders in January 2026 than some federal agencies have violated in their entire existence.” Schiltz warned that he would haul Lyons or other government officials into court if they kept ignoring court rulings. “ICE is not a law unto itself,” he wrote.

Letters from an American - https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/january-28-2026

The USofA is literally a country founded on the principle of not allowing Kings or autocracts, certainly not federal authority, step on states right and self determination.

[direwolf20]

What would you have do in on any other authoritarian regime?

If the government comes to your house and kidnaps your wife, is your first instinct 1: let them, don't fight and 2: vote harder?

[dTal]

Rule of law? Innocent people are being shot.

[account42]

Wile I don't think they deserved to loose their lives over it, calling them "innocent" is quite dishonest. They were at the very least intentionally being a nuisance and in most cases breaking actual laws in the process.

[JumpCrisscross]

> They were at the very least intentionally being a nuisance and in most cases breaking actual laws in the process

Pretti was breaking zero laws. You’d have to do some prosecutorial voodoo to conjure up a misdemeanor.

There is lawbreaking in that videos. But the felony-level stuff is all from folks in uniform. (Which, thankfully, they’ve started wearing.)

[mexicocitinluez]

> calling them "innocent" is quite dishonest

You're not actually arguing that American citizens shouldn't be able to film the cops are you? That would be pretty un-American.

[maxehmookau]

Being a nuisance is not illegal. In the eyes of the law, someone being a nuisance is, indeed, innocent - and to say so is not dishonest.

[kdkirsch]

So now being a nuisance is justification for summary extrajudicial executions?! If people on HN believe this then we’re toast.

[zahlman]

That is not at all the argument being made.

[florkbork]

Nonsense.

ICE are engaging in violence, warrantless forced entry to homes, at least two shootings that border on murder, they even tried to force entry into an Ecuadorian embassy.

They are detaining citizens at random, relocating them physically and in some cases releasing them; if they don't die in detention due to lack of access to medical care.

If you cannot see how these activities should be observed, documented, protested whilst still standing for professed Amercian values...

Edit: Ah excellent, downvotes without reply because facts are... uncomfortable!

Here's the sources:

https://kstp.com/kstp-news/top-news/ice-agents-blocked-from-... - Ecuadorian consulate.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/a-u-s-citizen-says-ice-f... - warrantless entry

https://www.propublica.org/article/immigration-dhs-american-... - many, many US citizens detained only for charges to vanish at the merest scrutiny

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/27/five-year-ol... - deporting citizens

https://newrepublic.com/post/205458/ice-detainees-pay-for-me... - cutting off medical care

https://abcnews.go.com/US/detainees-heard-cuban-man-slammed-... - deaths in custody

[nobody9999]

>Because the whole point of tracking ICE is to help people dodge them. It's absurd that people cry foul when the government goes after people actively opposing the rule of law.

By your logic, combined with the actions of the ICE folks in Minneapolis, anyone who submits the location of a DUI checkpoint into Waze[0] should be summarily executed?

Is that your argument? ICE has murdered people for documenting their locations and actions which, by your statement was to allow others to "dodge" law enforcement.

Documenting a DUI checkpoint does exactly the same thing. So. If your position is that law "enforcement" is allowed to summarily shoot to death folks who document their actions and locations in one context, then they should be allowed to do so in other, more serious contexts like DUI checkpoints.

Is that your claim? If not, please do provide some nuance around what you said, because that's how I understood your statements.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waze