Democratic members of Congress who were part of a scuffle with law enforcement officers at an ICE facility in New Jersey may face arrests, the Department of Homeland Security confirmed to Axios Saturday.

Why it matters: It would be a major escalation in the Trump administration’s arrests of politicians and other public servants, including the mayor of Newark and a judge in Milwaukee.

  • DHS is accusing the House Democrats of assaulting law enforcement. The lawmakers say they were the ones who were assaulted.
  • The lawmakers involved in the incident: Reps. Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-N.J.), Rob Menendez (D-N.J.) and LaMonica McIver (D-N.J.).
  • Doom@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    Because the law isn’t always right and ICE is a dog shit thing anyway so honestly nah if the representatives broke the law shoot ICE anyway fuck em.

    Also I dunno you never heard of you or seen you post but you seem like a smarmy little swine

    • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      Because the law isn’t always right

      Well the law is what is legal. If people break the law, they should be charged. This is hardly a new concept. You don’t think lawbreakers should be charged?

      • SpaceShort@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        42 minutes ago

        The law has no inherent moral value. It requires at the very least democratic legitimacy to do so, and even that is subject to conditions.

      • Doom@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        No I don’t because if they were this country wouldn’t exist.

        It is American to resist bullshit laws. The founding fathers made that clear so no you’re wrong now sit down and shut up

      • JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        16 hours ago

        You’re not wrong, but that idealism assumes that the law is just and supported by due process and the writ of habeus corpus…not the desires of an unchecked tyrant.

        We are currently in the latter.

        It’s very concerning that people like you are unable to foresee the consequences of that.

        • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          8 hours ago

          So when I said:

          If they broke the law arrest them and charge them. If not, leave them alone.

          Where did I say leave out due process?

          Also there is no “unchecked tyrant” lol. Literally everything the US President is trying to do is being “checked” and litigated against.