Constitution-Free Zone Alive & Well!

Old Feb 6, 18, 7:15 am
  #91  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 17,661
Originally Posted by txviking View Post
The threat of arrest if unable to provide proof of citizenship violates the guarantees of the 4th amendment against unresonable search or seizure. There is a generally accepted exception within 100 air miles of a US border, however, which would effectively cover all of Florida. (I don't agree with this exception, but the courts have repeatedly upheld such searches as "reasonable".)
So as currently interpreted there was no violation in this case, correct? The United States has laws that controls entry and immigration. This person stayed beyond her visa period and was in violation. Removal is often the result of overstaying a visa which is what seems to be the case here. If a person wishes to immigrate to the United States then follow the law. Otherwise get what is rightfully coming.
Boggie Dog is offline  
Old Feb 6, 18, 9:12 am
  #92  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Newport Beach, California, USA
Posts: 36,062
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog View Post
So as currently interpreted there was no violation in this case, correct? The United States has laws that controls entry and immigration. This person stayed beyond her visa period and was in violation. Removal is often the result of overstaying a visa which is what seems to be the case here. If a person wishes to immigrate to the United States then follow the law. Otherwise get what is rightfully coming.
Sorry, but you seem to miss the point entirely. What makes this "case" important is not the fact that the woman was deported, but that there appears to be a violation of both the 4th and 5th Amendments by ICE. In America, no one has to prove to a LEO in a random stop that they haven't committed a crime.
PTravel is offline  
Old Feb 6, 18, 10:39 am
  #93  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 17,661
Originally Posted by PTravel View Post
Sorry, but you seem to miss the point entirely. What makes this "case" important is not the fact that the woman was deported, but that there appears to be a violation of both the 4th and 5th Amendments by ICE. In America, no one has to prove to a LEO in a random stop that they haven't committed a crime.
Do you know of any legal action being taken against CBP in this case?

Not having been there I don't know what conversation might have taken place and assuming that Federal LEO's violated this woman's rights without evidence seems a bit much.
Boggie Dog is offline  
Old Feb 6, 18, 12:51 pm
  #94  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Dulles, VA
Programs: UA Life Gold, Marriott Life Titanium
Posts: 2,673
Boggie, a massive point that you seem to be missing is that they stopped a busload of people, not just one person. They violated everyone's rights on that bus, just to nab one person who overstayed her visa.

I doubt if too many people who have commented on this thread ride Greyhound, but if they started doing this on domestic airline flights or Amtrak or any public transit system in any city, then we are getting very close to a "paper's please" form of government.
muji likes this.
catocony is offline  
Old Feb 6, 18, 1:14 pm
  #95  
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 5,702
Originally Posted by catocony View Post
Boggie, a massive point that you seem to be missing is that they stopped a busload of people, not just one person. They violated everyone's rights on that bus, just to nab one person who overstayed her visa.

I doubt if too many people who have commented on this thread ride Greyhound, but if they started doing this on domestic airline flights or Amtrak or any public transit system in any city, then we are getting very close to a "paper's please" form of government.
And if getting off the plane on a flight between say ORD and FLL was delayed by CBP for the 90 minutes or more it would take to check a plane full of passengers who weren't expecting or prepared for a document check, we'd be hearing plenty of squealing right here.
rickg523 is offline  
Old Feb 6, 18, 1:15 pm
  #96  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Newport Beach, California, USA
Posts: 36,062
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog View Post
Do you know of any legal action being taken against CBP in this case?
No. And it doesn't matter. My professional opinion is that what happened was a violation of this person's 4th and 5th Amendment rights. You don't have to believe me, but I'm also not alone in thinking this.

Not having been there I don't know what conversation might have taken place and assuming that Federal LEO's violated this woman's rights without evidence seems a bit much.
All the "evidence" is right there. When someone is on a bus and can't readily get off because ICE is blocking the way, that is detainment and also coercive. Interrogation while detained in a coercive context is a violation of 4th and 5th Amendment rights -- what counts is the person's perception. And, again, the idea that someone must prove to LEOs that they haven't done something wrong when there was no reason for the LEOs to be there in the first place is completely offensive to the fundamental principles of American justice (and the Constitution).

If you don't believe me, ask the ACLU. <deleted>.

Last edited by TWA884; Feb 6, 18 at 1:26 pm Reason: Not necessary
PTravel is offline  
Old Feb 6, 18, 1:29 pm
  #97  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 17,661
Originally Posted by PTravel View Post
No. And it doesn't matter. My professional opinion is that what happened was a violation of this person's 4th and 5th Amendment rights. You don't have to believe me, but I'm also not alone in thinking this.

All the "evidence" is right there. When someone is on a bus and can't readily get off because ICE is blocking the way, that is detainment and also coercive. Interrogation while detained in a coercive context is a violation of 4th and 5th Amendment rights -- what counts is the person's perception. And, again, the idea that someone must prove to LEOs that they haven't done something wrong when there was no reason for the LEOs to be there in the first place is completely offensive to the fundamental principles of American justice (and the Constitution).

If you don't believe me, ask the ACLU. <Deleted>.
<deleted>. As far as I know no one here has any first hand evidence of exactly what occurred on that bus. What words were spoken, what physical actions were taken. I know I don't, do you? I have no problem with the ACLU but I think you have to agree they often take the side of the most liberal reading of the Constitution. I would think that if any violations were made by CBP then someone would have initiated some sort of action by now. <deleted>

Last edited by TWA884; Feb 6, 18 at 1:39 pm Reason: Response to deleted content
Boggie Dog is offline  
Old Feb 6, 18, 1:39 pm
  #98  
Moderator: Travel Safety/Security, Travel Tools, California, Los Angeles; FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: VNY | BUR | LAX
Programs: AAdvantage | MileagePlus
Posts: 13,926
Exclamation Moderator's Note:

Please keep in mind the following FlyerTalk Rule when posting:
12.2 Avoid Getting Personal
If you have a difference of opinion with another member, challenge the idea — NOT the person. Getting personal with another member is not allowed. Personal attacks, insults, baiting and flaming will not be tolerated.

<snip>
Future personal exchanges will be summarily deleted without further notice. Repeat offenders will be subject to discipline (FT Rule 23).

TWA884
Travel Safety/Security co-moderator
TWA884 is offline  
Old Feb 6, 18, 2:49 pm
  #99  
Moderator: Manufactured Spending
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 6,082
Originally Posted by PTravel View Post
All the "evidence" is right there. When someone is on a bus and can't readily get off because ICE is blocking the way, that is detainment and also coercive. Interrogation while detained in a coercive context is a violation of 4th and 5th Amendment rights -- what counts is the person's perception. And, again, the idea that someone must prove to LEOs that they haven't done something wrong when there was no reason for the LEOs to be there in the first place is completely offensive to the fundamental principles of American justice (and the Constitution).
I'm not sure you're correct that the person's perception is what counts.

If the police pull me over, take my license and registration from me, and then say "we need to search your car", my perception may be that I have no choice but to say "okay". But if I do, that is clearly a consensual search.
cbn42 is offline  
Old Feb 6, 18, 7:08 pm
  #100  
Moderator: Travel Safety/Security, Travel Tools, California, Los Angeles; FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: VNY | BUR | LAX
Programs: AAdvantage | MileagePlus
Posts: 13,926
Originally Posted by cbn42 View Post
But if I do, that is clearly a consensual search.
Not necessarily. To be valid, consent to search must be voluntary. There is a long line of cases holding that coercion vitiates consent.
muji likes this.
TWA884 is offline  
Old Feb 7, 18, 1:36 am
  #101  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: CPH
Programs: Delta SM
Posts: 497
Originally Posted by cbn42 View Post
But if I do, that is clearly a consensual search.
"Your money or your life."
FredAnderssen is offline  
Old Feb 7, 18, 10:49 am
  #102  
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 203
Amtrak now, too:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/border...heyre-citizens

CBP is telling riders to prove they are citizens, not that they are here legally. What would happen to a LPR or tourist who was caught?
mauve is offline  
Old Feb 7, 18, 12:17 pm
  #103  
Ari
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 11,131
Originally Posted by rickg523 View Post
And if getting off the plane on a flight between say ORD and FLL was delayed by CBP for the 90 minutes or more it would take to check a plane full of passengers who weren't expecting or prepared for a document check, we'd be hearing plenty of squealing right here.
It did happen. There was squealing. ACLU sued.

CBP ID Checks of Passengers Arriving on Domestic Flights
Ari is offline  
Old Feb 7, 18, 1:41 pm
  #104  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,425
Ari, you might want to fix that useful link...

I know it's only been a few months, but how is that lawsuit proceding?
nachtnebel is offline  
Old Feb 8, 18, 12:15 am
  #105  
Ari
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 11,131
Originally Posted by nachtnebel View Post
Ari, you might want to fix that useful link...

I know it's only been a few months, but how is that lawsuit proceding?
Not well; the government more or less ignored routine court scheduling and conferencing orders and then pretended it didn't. The Magistrate Judge on the case wasn't buying it:

Originally Posted by Vera M. Scanlon, USMJ on 01/25/2018
Defendant failed to participate in the discovery preparation process without justification. Defendant is on notice that it is expected to participate in the litigation and comply with the Court's orders. Such conduct is not expected to continue.
Expect more in late March or early April.
Ari is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: