425
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2026
425 points (100.0% liked)
politics
30930 readers
1672 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Previously, ICE was only set loose to terrorize, incite, and murder the brown population. So yeah, this is pretty much business as usual.
ICE wasn't previously "let loose," the deportation process existed (and happened way too often), but people received due process.
Due process by who, Obama denied due process to 75% of the millions he deported
Lmfao who's ass did you pull that from?
I'm not an Obama Stan but the immigration policy was pretty tame during his administration.
There was a shift from voluntary removals (aka tossing them back over the border) to formal proceedings and a change to prioritize recent arrivals, those caught at the border and felons. By 2013, 87% of removals were in this top priority category.
So contrary to whatever edgy narrative you're imagining in your head, immigration enforcement was nothing like this before.
The ACLU, I know their kind of reporting isnt typical brunch discussion so I see how you could have missed it. And they are referencing the same website you try and claim was uneventful
Neat, appreciate the source. None of that refutes anything in my source and in fact the two paint the same picture. Obama's policy decision to formalize removals put more cases in the court docket. This (and other factors) put a massive backlog on reviews and they cut corners for the 80% of ostensibly open/shut cases.
Could Obama have done way better? Absolutely. But compared to the previous two administrations keeping things off book, it was still a step in the right direction to bring those to light in the formal process.
You keep saying "brunch" which I assume is to imply that everyone who's mad now was blissfully unaware of any problems 10 years ago. Not only is that not true but it's massively disingenuous.
DACA was a bandaid, but even as a gesture it showed an entirely different atmosphere around immigration and reform. Somehow Obama using his executive power to mitigate a problem is the same as Trump telling DACA kids to self deport while ethnically cleansing entire cities?
Gtfo you clown