this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2026
316 points (99.4% liked)

politics

30525 readers
2499 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Immigration and Customs Enforcement has made yet another arrest at a New York City immigration court, despite a May ruling from a federal judge that broadly blocked such detentions.

U.S. District Judge Kevin Castel, a George W. Bush appointee, ruled May 18 that ICE never had the legal justification to make these arrests. His order, which applied to immigration courts in Manhattan, kneecapped the agency’s controversial strategy of detaining people as they arrived for mandatory immigration hearings.

Despite that, ICE has made at least six arrests in Manhattan immigration courts since Castel issued his order. The latest arrest came on Thursday, when agents detained Bronx resident Matar Ndiaye while he was “dutifully attending an immigration court hearing for his asylum claim,” according to court filings.

Contempt charges?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SarcasticMan@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago (3 children)

This is all theater. The courts will hem and haw about rights and rule of law but ultimately wont do jack shit all to cement the SS...sorry ICEs position above the law and ability to take who ever when ever they want from where ever.

[–] in_my_honest_opinion@piefed.social 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

You're not wrong. The court was complicit as they can declare the "arrests" illegal.

Minor correction, these aren't the SS they are the SA. This is why we need to fight now, they're not yet organized enough to be the SS, they're still forming. We still have a chance to create enough political pressure to disband them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturmabteilung

[–] SarcasticMan@lemmy.world 3 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

I tend to use the SS stamp because most people I talk to about this stare at you blankly when you say SA. Everyone knows who the SS were. You are right though here on Lemmy I should have made the distinction. Or you could also say potato potato lol

Tomato tomahtoe. Keep up the good fight

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 6 points 3 days ago

2 years down the line and they'll issue the third final warning to stop doing illegal things, which the appeals court will immediately stay because a few months without optimal inductions into the concentration camps is considered an irreversible harm.

[–] unemployedclaquer@sopuli.xyz 5 points 3 days ago

All the ice agents look like they have pink eye.