My takeaway from this is that laws and rules don't matter if the officials on the ground are incompetent, ignorant, and have contempt for you.
There is a lot of unnecessary cruelty and lack of due process in this story.
replies(5):
There is a lot of unnecessary cruelty and lack of due process in this story.
> The reality became clear: Ice detention isn’t just a bureaucratic nightmare. It’s a business. These facilities are privately owned and run for profit.
> Companies like CoreCivic and GEO Group receive government funding based on the number of people they detain, which is why they lobby for stricter immigration policies. It’s a lucrative business: CoreCivic made over $560m from Ice contracts in a single year. In 2024, GEO Group made more than $763m from Ice contracts.
> The more detainees, the more money they make. It stands to reason that these companies have no incentive to release people quickly. What I had experienced was finally starting to make sense.
"due process" is what you are due - it is what is afforded to you by the 4th amendment and habeus corpus. Op is correct.
(ECHR is different on this, which has caused a lot of controversy in the UK from people who want to be arbitrarily brutal towards non-citizens)
This isn't true and what I wish more than anything in life is if people would stop repeating unadulterated propaganda because that literally normalizes it.
> The Court reasoned that aliens physically present in the United States, regardless of their legal status, are recognized as persons guaranteed due process of law by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S8-C18-8...
And don't try to gotcha me either - yes the same article says they have qualified the extent of those rights but
1. The qualifications are not "you have to be a citizen" but whether you "developed substantial ties to this country."
2. This woman had a work visa - I'd call that pretty substantial ties
Nope, most of the constitutional rights apply to all people under the jurisdiction of the US. It's why the Bush administration set up Guantanamo--to try to evade any hint of constitutional protection, and he still failed that. (Of course, as Guantanamo also shows, the remedies available to people whose constitutional rights have been grossly violated by the government are quite lacking.)
Not within 100 miles of the border unfortunately. https://www.aclu.org/documents/constitution-100-mile-border-...
Taken from your link:
> In practice, Border Patrol agents routinely ignore or misunderstand the limits of their legal authority in the course of individual stops, resulting in violations of the constitutional rights of innocent people. These problems are compounded by inadequate training for Border Patrol agents, a lack of oversight by CBP and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and the consistent failure of CBP to hold agents accountable for abuse. No matter what CBP officers and Border Patrol agents think, our Constitution applies throughout the United States, including within this “100-mile border zone.”
It seems that non-US citizen still have rights, but abuse is rampant within the US border patrol.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) may search any electronic devices without probable cause at these points.
see https://informationsecurity.princeton.edu/sites/g/files/toru...
and
https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/usa-border-phones-search-1.4...
Canada doesn't behave this way - https://www.harrisonpensa.com/new-limits-imposed-on-border-s...
Although while I'm here, I will note that they still don't discuss the fact that--as far as I can tell--all the regulations and laws means the 100 miles start not from the water's edge, but from the international boundary, which is 12 miles out to sea. And which also means Chicago is not in the 100 mile border zone, since the actual Canadian border is on the side of Michigan, well over 100 miles away.