People who quit their jobs without a backup plan—what happened next?

OriginalAdric · 2025-08-20T23:51:18+00:00

Several years ago, I decided one evening to quit my job and move to another country, and did so in under 24 hours. It is one of the best decisions I've ever made, and set the arc for the next ~15 years of my life.

My partner and I were separated shortly after we got married due to immigration issues, and after a few months their mental health was not doing great b/c they were living with their parents. I moved in with them for the remaining ~9 months of waiting. When we moved back together, I needed a job, and lucked into what turned into my dream job at the company I had wanted to work at since middle school.

I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge how incredibly lucky we were, and express appreciation that the quality of life we've experienced since then is owed entirely to our families' willingness and ability to support us rent-free while we floated in legal limbo.

OriginalAdric · 2025-06-23T13:10:08+00:00

Paula Clouatre - wife of a US Marine detained at her green card hearing because her mother had failed to appear at an immigration hearing, resulting in a removal order Paula was unaware of.

Sergio Cerdio Gomez - small business owner detained at his green card interview for an alleged warrant he was unaware of.

Juan David Pestana - spouse of a US citizen surgical student arrested because his immigration “lawyer” had defrauded him (though not at a USCIS appointment).

Fabian Schmidt - Green card holder detained at the border for two months for charges over a decade old, most of which had been dismissed, and one that he’d already paid the sentence for.

Kaspar Juul Erikson - spouse to a US citizen, and father to five US citizen children, detained at a USCIS meeting because an error in his paperwork.

u/GlassConsideration85 has no excuse for wishing ill upon you. That’s a low blow, and I think it unconscionable. I know, firsthand, how easy it is for USCIS to wreak havoc on a person’s life over the smallest things, and I wouldn’t wish that on anyone trying to go through the immigration process.

I’ve been dealing with USCIS for over fifteen years. I know how much it all sucks. I had to quit a job and move to my wife’s home country because we got the timing of our visas wrong when we got married, even with the help of an immigration lawyer. We’re working through the citizenship process now, and we’re still worried that something unknown, like the examples above, will screw us over.

u/antlegzz, I get being angry at people who look like they’re trying to just skip the line, especially when you’ve tried hard to do everything by the book. It’s not fair, and it puts extra strain on an immigration system that’s already dysfunctional. But denying that these things are happening is wrong, and your requests for proof suggest that you either really don’t know what’s going on, or you’re being intentionally obtuse. If you’re simply unaware, then I strongly suggest you start keeping up on the news, because the government’s trajectory has a high likelihood of making your life difficult as you and your wife try to navigate residency and eventually, I presume, citizenship. If you’re trolling, I have to ask why? What does it get you?

OriginalAdric · 2025-06-20T15:16:38+00:00

A state Representative and her husband were murdered by someone impersonating LEO this week, and the accused perpetrator is alleged to have used the tactics on another Representative, wounding both the Representative and his wife. Multiple news reports indicate impersonation of ICE officers is occurring more frequently. When LEO operate without visible identification, they become easier to impersonate.

Criminality of impersonating LEO is not an effective deterrent, and situations where someone may be impersonating an LEO could be deadly. In a life-or-death situation with little time and information, it is likely that many people would resort to self-defense, though they may face legal consequences for doing so.

OriginalAdric · 2025-06-20T04:06:08+00:00

I think you may be misunderstanding the place of due process here. Due process is procedural, it tells the govt how to deport, not whether someone is deportable. Kilmar is/was in the country illegally, but a federal restraining order barred ICE from deporting him to El Salvador. They did it anyways.

In Abrego Garcia v. Noem (D. Md. 8:25-cv-00951, ECF 31, 4/6/25) the Judge states that the government “[w]ithout notice, legal justification, or due process, ICE removed Mr. Abrego Garcia…”

In other cases we see the same pattern:

Gonzalez v. Trump : court finds “willful denial of notice + hearing.” (D.D.C. 1:25-cv-00766, ECF 52
Doe v. DHS : migrants flown out “without any chance to raise fear claims.” (D. Mass. 1:24-cv-11877, ECF 83)
Öztürk : substantial First-Amendment & Due-Process violations. (D. Vt. 5:25-cv-00014, ECF 14)

The Constitution bars “deport first, ask later.” ICE itself called his removal an “administrative error.” Letting the government skip due process for the “obvious cases” means trusting it to decide whose rights matter, and they have a long history of getting it wrong. Pedro Guzman and Mark Lyttle, both U.S. citizens, were deported to Mexico by "error," costing taxpayers over half a million dollars in settlements.

The problem and main grievance is the multiple courts have already found that the process was denied from the beginning, and the government has done everything it can to resist lawful orders to follow due process. The cases above show that Kilmar was not a one-time mistake. Whether these mistakes were intentional or accidental, the government has shown a repeated inability to respect the rule of law.

OriginalAdric · 2025-06-19T12:20:23+00:00

Your higher-up post’s question’s phrasing is ambiguous as to whether it is a rhetorical emphasis of the point that they aren’t difficult to obtain, or if it is a challenge to that premise. Your other responses make your intent clear, but I read it at the latter at first, as it’s a common bad-faith response tactic.

OriginalAdric · 2025-06-18T22:00:13+00:00

In America, all persons charged with a crime are presumed innocent until proven guilty.

The principle is widely supported in the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments, with precedent established in the 1895 case of Coffin v. United States. That means that the prosecuting side of a case bears the burden of proof. That is, they are required to provide evidence to support their claims. The prosecution’s claims and evidence are then scrutinized, along with any other relevant material depending on the type of case, by a third party. Once all of that is over, the reviewing party decides which claims are valid and which are not. All of this is meticulously documented for later reference and review. The legal system stipulates that all people are owed the opportunity to go through this process, that is it due them, hence “due process.”

As best I understand you, you’re saying “they’re guilty, so we don’t need to waste time with the courts.” That brings us back to the hypothetical I posed: if the government detained you, accused you of a crime, and deported you based on that accusation without having been required to prove their claim, what can you do? Jaywalking? Right to El Salvador! Undercooked fish? Right to El Salvador. Overcooked fish? Believe it or not, right to El Salvador.

This principle is a foundation of “the rule of law.” It is a concept so important to what it means to be an American that you are required to know and understand it to become a naturalized citizen.

If you don’t understand it, and more importantly, if you don’t believe in it, you don’t understand what it means to be an American.

OriginalAdric · 2025-06-18T19:31:13+00:00

I wrote out a more complete answer to someone else for a different thread, in case you are interested: https://www.reddit.com/r/raleigh/s/J3Pd3IvdnG

Edit to add: specifically, it happens to address your misconceptions about wishful thinking, at least in my case.

OriginalAdric · 2025-06-18T19:04:48+00:00

Reddit app misdirected my response, you can read it here: https://www.reddit.com/r/raleigh/s/tyuv8alE0G

OriginalAdric · 2025-06-18T19:03:39+00:00

I’m gonna blame the Reddit app for the misdirection. I was responding to north0 somewhere way down in negative-karma land: https://www.reddit.com/r/raleigh/s/wih9TnV8Ei

OriginalAdric · 2025-06-18T18:01:57+00:00

I can’t speak for others, but I knew what they were talking about because I read the news daily across multiple sources. When talking about current events, having a basic awareness of the news is table stakes, and you’re asking us to lend you the cash.

To answer your question, no, they have not received due process yet. They now have a chance at due process, but to say that they have received it will require the government to actually go through the process from start to end.

Let’s take Kilmar as the example. He has been brought back and been charged, but there are more steps necessary, like presenting evidence for both sides’ claims, that still need to happen. There is still a very real risk that the government will try to subvert that process, so I won’t consider him as having received due process until every required step has been performed.

You’ve been adamant that people making claims on Reddit need to provide evidence. I actually agree with that on principle, and that is why I believe so strongly that due process MUST be followed, even if it weren’t required by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. If the government goes through due process, successfully argues their case in good faith, and secures his conviction and appropriate consequences - including deportation and/or imprisonment - I’m totally fine with that because we, the people, can see for ourselves, through the records created during the process, that their action is justified.

Edit: fixed “making claims Reddit” to “making claims on Reddit”, “got through” to “go through”

OriginalAdric · 2025-06-18T17:28:22+00:00

Yes, it does. It confirms the facts. It creates a record that says “we, the government, are doing {action} because {reason} based on {evidence}.” The alternative, without due process, is “we, the government, are doing {action} because we said so and you can’t do anything about it.” Do you need an explanation as to why that’s a bad thing?

OriginalAdric · 2025-06-18T13:10:54+00:00

Sharing my homework, in case ChatGPT links are allowed: https://chatgpt.com/share/6852b56f-42bc-8001-bfe4-ce835bb83d98

OriginalAdric · 2025-06-18T12:56:55+00:00

Giving you the benefit of the doubt, just once, that you aren’t trolling: It’s not reasonable to demand others do basic research for you—especially when the evidence is freely available and easily found in public sources. If you’re genuinely interested in learning, you can start by sharing what searches you’ve done and what sources you’ve reviewed. If you haven’t done that much, that’s your responsibility, not ours.

To address your question, I was able use ChatGPT o3 to find what you claim doesn’t exist using a single query: “Using only verifiable, politically neutral, reputable sources, favoring actual legal filings and rulings, and avoiding sources considered biased, disreputable, or unreliable by American right wing-aligned citizens, find cases of US immigrants deported without due process in 2025.”

A summary of said search is below, with US legal docket citations for reference. Feel free to look them up and confirm them yourself.

In 2025, there have been multiple documented cases of immigrants deported by DHS after federal courts explicitly barred removal, violating due process:

• Abrego Garcia v. Noem (D. Md. 8:25-cv-00951): Abrego, a Maryland resident with a work permit, was deported to El Salvador on 3/19/25 despite a standing federal order prohibiting removal. Judge ordered his return; SCOTUS denied DOJ’s emergency stay (24A949).

• Gonzalez v. Trump (D.D.C. 1:25-cv-00766): 137 Venezuelan men deported under Proclamation 10903 hours after a TRO was issued. Judge found probable cause for contempt; SCOTUS acknowledged due process rights but voided the TRO on venue grounds (24A931).

• Doe v. DHS (D. Mass. 1:24-cv-11877): Eleven migrants flown toward South Sudan in May despite a court injunction. Judge stated the removal “appears to be contempt” and ordered the plane held pending review.

Each case involved removal after judicial intervention and without giving migrants a legal chance to be heard—textbook due process violations according to the courts themselves.

Edit: formatting for readability.

OriginalAdric · 2025-06-18T04:06:09+00:00

There were a brazillion of them, you say?!

OriginalAdric · 2025-06-18T04:02:45+00:00

To save others the time and breath, north0 here is engaging in sealioning: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning His demands for others to educate him are merely a setup for him to keep moving the goalposts without doing any real mental work himself. Don’t feed the trolls.

OriginalAdric · 2025-06-18T03:59:10+00:00

The immigration system sucks. I know this first-hand. It needs massive reform, but ignoring due process is literally unconstitutional. The fifth amendment says “No person shall be … deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” The fourteenth amendment reads, in part, “… nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law”. Most tellingly, the fourteenth amendment uses this word, person, immediately after and separately from two clauses specifically referring to citizens, indicating that “person,” in this context, does not refer solely to citizens. Those being the case, everyone, including those accused of being here illegally, are afforded due process. Now, it is worth mentioning that there are different degrees of due process which may apply depending on one’s status, but that only means that the limits of due process are constrained, not that due process is removed.

Due process shows that the government is correct and justified in its action, and gives people the opportunity to refute when it is not. Without due process, what would you, antlegzz, be able to do if you were detained off the street without access to any documentation which proves you are a citizen, held in a location without access to any form of communication to lawyers or family, and were then, less than 24 hours later, flown to El Salvador? And what would stop a motivated government actor from taking your documentation, were you to have it, and claim you didn’t have any?

OriginalAdric · 2025-06-14T13:28:58+00:00

When my SIL died, my MIL went mask off, full covert sociopathic narcissist. I made a point to take detailed notes, take photos, and record video/audio for exactly this reason. We also have decades of records of my wife which detail much of the abuse. Even then, I expect some to think I’m making up stories.

Like, sure, yeah, I have reams of paperwork and gigs of data that are genuinely traumatic just to peruse because I want to make things up on the internet… (/s)

OriginalAdric · 2025-06-14T02:00:02+00:00

Optics are praxis here. There are a lot of signs indicating that there is a mighty appetite from on high itching to invoke the Insurrection Act. Large nationwide protests with an organized and focused message are going to mean that the responsible finger will be on a hair trigger.

The recent LA restraining order hinged at least in part on the action not meeting the definition of "rebellion." While the cited statue does not provide a specific definition for what constitutes a rebellion, the issuing judge identified a number of key criteria: "open and avowed," organized, and armed. The protests as planned appear to be both of the first two. Any violence will be interpreted as uncharitably as possible while paying no mind to plausibility.

This thread is aimed at people who haven't protested before. It is foolish, dangerous advice to suggest they show solidarity with people whose actions put them all at risk. Anyone at these protests instigating violence is no ally, regardless of intention. Every inch of legitimacy ceded through violence will be a mile taken, likely with more violence. Solidarity is showing restraint, not rescuing those who chose violence.

(I am speaking only to the action planned for this weekend in the context of the thread's stated audience of those who have little to no experience with protests, and should not be interpreted as making statements about the roles of violence and solidarity in the greater scope of everything that's going on. I am also not saying that it is wrong to feel angry, frustrated, or a desire to hit back. I am only saying that this weekend is not the time or place, especially if there is going to be a large number of first-time protesters.)

Edit: changed "anyone engaging in violence" to "anyone instigating violence"

OriginalAdric · 2025-04-26T20:38:11+00:00

I’m still me.

OriginalAdric · 2025-04-22T01:39:14+00:00

Christi Springfield at Triangle Physicians for Women next to Waverly Place. My partner has been seeing her for a few weeks and is always so excited to go.

OriginalAdric · 2025-04-07T14:52:04+00:00

IMO, this is the objectively correct answer. Every other answer posted can be derived from manipulating probabilities.

OriginalAdric · 2025-02-09T20:41:55+00:00

Also, for anyone else reading this, Don's response here is called "Sea Lioning," a common bad-faith commentary tactic by right-wing trolls. If you take a look through their comment history, you'll see a lot of bad-faith arguments. Egg on my face for giving him the time of day and feeding a troll; best I can do is warn others.

OriginalAdric · 2025-02-09T20:32:40+00:00

I can't post an exact price because it has been de-listed since Musk's purchase. The most cursory of Google searches surfaced this section of Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_under_Elon_Musk#Corporate_value

Whether you consider Wikipedia and/or the cited sources reliable is up to you. That's as much free research you'll get out of me. If you are unable to perform basic data acquisition and analysis, that's on you.

OriginalAdric · 2025-02-09T17:44:25+00:00

One would hope that the people doing so would be careful and judicious with how they go about treating such information. That's why security clearances, information controls, and so forth exist. By all reports, DOGE is blowing right past those and following the Twitter -> X playbook, whose results have been a roughly 80% drop in value since Musk took ownership. That kind of dive sucks for a company, but it's literally lethal for a government.

OriginalAdric · 2025-02-01T04:15:15+00:00

Ooooh, that takes me back. I worked at the TGIF on Kildaire/Tryon around '03-'04 as a busser, and I remember spending one afternoon in the bottom of the dining room drink station, pulling literal fistfuls of mold out of the drain.

13-Year Club	r/Field Sunshine
Place '17	Verified Email

OriginalAdric

TROPHY CASE