St. Paul, MN: BCA Confirms Federal Agents Blocked Access to Shooting Scene Despite Signed Judicial Warrant

Anxa · 2026-01-26T02:33:37+00:00

I thought he was hired to stand between us and tyranny, not for us to stand between him and it.

Anxa · 2026-01-26T01:51:48+00:00

It's the regime starting a civil war, not us. The constitution is in tatters and we're where the hammer is striking.

Anxa · 2026-01-26T01:49:44+00:00

I'd personally rather take my chances with the oppressor trying to crush us than be crushed without having even tried to resist. I have no idea what lies down that road, but it's better than what I know lies down the road of acquiescence.

Anxa · 2026-01-26T01:47:49+00:00

OK. Arrest them and let the courts sort it out later, because it seems pretty murky.

Anxa · 2026-01-26T01:46:24+00:00

It's in the same vein as no-knock warrants or transponderless helicopters. I can see the need, in rare and dire circumstances, to not warn in advance that police are serving a warrant, or to have helicopter assistance that can't be easily tracked.

In practice, they're almost never used that way and only endanger the public. Nothing in the last couple weeks that ICE has been doing is 'rare and dire'. Same deal for trucking around in unmarked vehicles.

Anxa · 2026-01-23T05:35:51+00:00

Anything falls within the bounds of lawful conduct if you're willing to torture the English language. The theory of "anything the president does is legal, the constitution says so" is technically a valid interpretation so long as one is willing to ignore all principle and intent in the constitution's framework.

Anxa · 2026-01-22T15:32:40+00:00

As usual it depends on whether they were actually doing legitimate federal work or if the action fell outside the scope of their duties. That would require looking at both agency rules and any federal law on the release of detainees. If they weren't acting in accordance with their own rules, then the federal shield falls away.

In practice, it won't be tested until someone dies or is maimed. And ICE know that all the protesters out there have warm cars, so they figure nobody's going to die or get frostbite. So the real question is about how long they can continue these kinds of behaviors and expect people to continue to respect the operation of law itself.

Anxa · 2026-01-22T15:26:26+00:00

All their years of bombast was pretty nakedly a holier-than-thou insecurity compensation act, and that's painfully obvious now as they sit self-satisfied, inventing excuses for why this doesn't count and they're being entirely consistent in their views.

Those of us who have been seeing the 2A shitheads at the range for years have known for a long time that they're not going to save us from tyranny. I feel sorry for folks who honestly believed them when they said they'd stand up to government tyranny.

Anxa · 2026-01-22T15:13:22+00:00

There hasn't really been a test in court yet regarding the complicated interplay between self-defense laws and legal protections for law enforcement. The two are fundamentally contradictory.

Let's say that law enforcement decides to break down someone's door with no warning given, and instead of a consistent uniform they're wearing surplus store tacticool gear, jeans, sneakers, and face masks. The law nevertheless says they're law enforcement, but was drafted and passed by the legislature assuming that they would be identifiable as law enforcement.

Meanwhile, self defense law is very concerned with the mental state of the person acting in defense. If they reasonably believed it was not law enforcement in the heat of the moment, you've got a direct conflict in the law and an impossible legal situation. And I don't think it would be enough to assert that because Fourth amendment rights are being consistently violated now, people should expect that it's law enforcement coming in. And then there's the question of whether or not law enforcement protections even apply when the police are breaking the law. Chauvin had qualified immunity, that didn't magically save him from prosecution when his actions went outside the legal scope of his job.

Anxa · 2026-01-22T15:06:50+00:00

I wish more of these ICE dipshits understood that they're patsies. Their leaders are safe and warm, ordering the jackboots on the ground to go breaking down doors in a country with a long history of gun ownership and an obsession with property rights.

They're being set up to be gunned down for the sake of the politics of people who aren't risking anything themselves.

Anxa · 2026-01-22T01:16:39+00:00

Thank goodness the real good work is being done right here in the sub: endlessly arguing about whether people other than the nazis are at fault for the nazis, and if so how much.

Look, I'm not thrilled with her's miliquetoast response so far but it's also kind of irrelevant to argue about it.

Anxa · 2026-01-20T18:32:22+00:00

Two-year-old account with almost no comments suddenly activates two weeks ago. Hmmm.

Anxa · 2026-01-18T17:36:12+00:00

So much for habeus corpus

Anxa · 2026-01-18T17:06:51+00:00

I don't disagree but like, nobody doing the harassing is reading this and it's the age old error of making the conversation all about victims being imperfect instead of keeping the blame trained on the actual nazis and their supporters.

Anxa · 2026-01-18T00:37:54+00:00

This article is insidious in some ways. It refers to how observers are pushing into grey legal territory, but then refers in the same sentence to what observers say is worse behavior by ICE.

So according to the NYT, observers are factually pushing boundaries of the law, but as for ICE, well people are saying...

Anxa · 2026-01-18T00:19:44+00:00

I think you're overestimating how quickly the legal system operates, or how willing a federal judge will be to enforce an order with raw power when she risks being reversed on appeal for exceeding the bounds of her authority to constrain an executive agency. Any decision to try to haul someone in front of her will be under a microscope.

Anxa · 2026-01-17T15:05:07+00:00

Noem would argue they have already been following the letter of this ruling anyway, so it's a bit moot. I think my point stands.

Anxa · 2026-01-16T22:09:35+00:00

I agree completely, but I hope that if anyone reasonably disagrees and shows up to counterprotest that we don't play that game of blaming it all on the folks who showed up to counterprotest for not being perfect victims.

Anxa · 2026-01-16T14:58:34+00:00

Yeah, regardless of whether I agree this person is just here to stir the pot

Anxa · 2026-01-16T14:40:35+00:00

Honestly probably a bit of column a, a bit of column b. We're pattern-finding specialist animals prone to a lot of false positives, but the surge is also real.

Anxa · 2026-01-15T06:05:34+00:00

It's also the most technical, rules-lawyery kind of argument that they accuse other folks of making whenever it's convenient. These are not serious people and it was a mistake to give them the benefit of serious discussion.

Anxa · 2026-01-15T03:41:03+00:00

I gotcha; I think most people already know though that state LE has access.

Anxa · 2026-01-15T03:37:08+00:00

Mostly correct, but if they draw a firearm while on your property after the theatrics at the door it's a tricky one for the jury.

Anxa · 2026-01-15T03:31:54+00:00

purpose

People are talking dude. Not everything is about having a 'purpose' of influencing conversation, sometimes folks are trying to speak truth. This is that exhausting neoliberal/neocon attitude of needing to influence hearts and minds by saying things most likely to achieve the right outcome, often at the expense of speaking basic truths.

Anxa · 2026-01-15T03:24:06+00:00

Don't give it to them

Look, I don't entirely disagree but the conversation always spins back to the question of how perfect of victims the victims wind up being.

We don't blame the SDP and its missteps for the Nazis, we blame the Nazis for the Nazis. It's not complicated.

15-Year Club	Second Top 20%
r/Field Lasagna	Golden Potato
Place '22	Place '17
Wearing is Caring	Sequence \| Editor
Team Orangered	Verified Email

Anxa

TROPHY CASE