350
What's to allege?
She is being illegally confined. Live on video. Out in the open.
So why the fuck did they go back, again?
Because if they stay gone long enough, their position can be declared abandoned and they can legally be replaced
It’s the same issue that plagues every person that is soberly seeing the collapse of American democracy. We all want to take a stand but at the end of the day these Texas Dems need to get back home for family, be in their districts with their constituents, and somehow go on with life. Even though everything is on the line it’s still not enough to loose yet for people, including the larger Texas populace.
So what I'm hearing is, there are a bunch of police who can, at the will of people who don't like them, be 'forcibly' moved into certain areas.
Let them escort you. Get the political credit of an assassination attempt and get rid of some actual factual totally not anything but government bootlickers.
They acknowledged that Texas law allows lawmakers who are absent from the Capitol to face civil arrest, but they say state officials have no legal right to detain legislators who are already present at the Capitol to ensure they don't leave.
Very normal country ya got there.
Tell me where you’re from and we can laugh about yours.
Dude, I'm from Hungary and the worst thing to happen to lawmakers in our current regime was slashed tires, stupid fines and getting carried out of the state media building.
This would be a next level even after 15 years of Orbán.
"b-b-b-but what about your country!"
🤷♂️ really. What about your country lol. Fascism is coming for the entire west.
So that means other states can just start randomly detaining members of their government, I guess? What a clusterfuck.
Only the fascist ones are considering it. The red ones.
I would rather California or New York or wherever do something like this to their Republican lawmakers than ruin the maps for all their voters
I am an equal opportunity polotician hater... Has she tried just leaving? Nothing I have read has said anyone has actually stopped her. I think both sides are showboating for thier base. But that is what we get when we choose our representatives via popularity contest.
I am an equal opportunity polotician hater...
Oh, so you're dishonest. Got it.
Has she tried just leaving?
She's a black woman in Texas. There's a nonzero chance that she'd be assaulted if not murdered by the thug enforcers of fascism for not complying, public official or not.
I think both sides are showboating for thier base
In this case, NEITHER side is showboating. One side is committing the crime of unlawful detainment in furtherance of forcing through an authoritarian agenda and the other side is pointing out that she's the victim of said crime and would prefer not to be illegally detained.
But that is what we get when we choose our representatives via popularity contest.
If only. Texas is one of if not THE most gerrymandered and otherwise politically rigged state.
There's more registered Democrats than Republicans in Texas, yet Republicans have a lock on every branch of government due to ratfucking like the aforementioned gerrymandering and making it MUCH more difficult to participate in elections if you live in a blue district/neighborhood and/or are a racial minority.
In other words, if it WAS a popularity contest, the GOP would lose most elections. Because it's actually a ratfucking contest, they "win" the vast majority of elections.
Nuance is difficult for you I see.
Not really, no. What nuances are you going to pretend I'm missing?
They assigned each Democrat rep a police escort, and the capital building has plenty of police present. It is physically enforced and the only way she'd be able to leave is to literally sign a permission slip allowing police to escort her everywhere and keep her under constant surveillance.
The Republicans are literally having goons follow their political rivals 24/7 and dictating where they are allowed to be, or must be, and when. This is not the time to hate both sides equally. Sometimes, the Nazis really are the bad guys.
See, I don't think it would be physically enforced. They can only arrest her or not. They can't restrict her to a location by force. The cops know that. And nothing in the "rule" says leaving without signing the slip is an arrestable offense. Even if they did arrest here, she could get out on bail very fast.
I don’t agree with any of the BS the GOP is trying to do there. But I feel like her staying is more of a stunt then actually being physically held against her will.
They can arrest anyone for anything they want. The executive branch controls the police and has that power. If it is an illegal arrest, you can pay thousands to a lawyer and spend a few months fighting it in court, but that is only after you are arrested. There is no magic "bail" number that lets you out of jail immediately, it's set by a judge on a case by case basis and takes a day or so to set. If you are a flight risk, as they claim is true in this case, you will not be allowed out on bail. If they really want to, they can hold you in a cell without letting you in front of a judge to get a bail set. Is it legal? No. Does it happen all of the time? Yes. Will anyone do anything about it? Never. Especially when POTUS is fully backing it.
I hear you, but no. If, and that's a big if, the local state courts didn't put an immediate stop to any of the illegal things you suggest they can do, then the federal would.
And you are conflating multiple issues. They can have the police follow her, as far as I know that isn't illegal. So she can easily say that she is not a flight risk. But, she will also have broken no laws by leaving the capital building. So if they arrest her, the local courts will 99% just dismiss it and let here go.
She isn't joe nobody. She has the weight of the democratic party behind her. That's a lot of lawyers, and a lot of money.
They are just posturing on the part about not being allowed to leave without signing the note.
I promise you, your faith in the system is admirable but unfounded. POTUS literally personally requested this, SCOTUS is full of bribe-taking jokers, and Congress is half made up of spineless tools that have demonstrated over and over again that they will defend their own in the face of literally anything, including Insurrection, rape, and child trafficking.
And, again, it literally does not matter in the slightest what the courts say, they can not go back in time and undo an arrest. And courts can't just go around ruling on random things. They need someone to bring a case to them, and cases require time, money, evidence, and cause/damages to put together. Then it takes months or years to move through the court system. Even if they could rule on whatever they want, they have no method of enforcement. That's the executive branch's job.
You may find SCOTUS's ruling on the Trail of Tears and the Executive branch's subsequent actions quite interesting. Hint: SCOTUS said no, Andrew Jackson did it anyway, no invisible force stopped any of it happening, legal or not.
I don't think you should say his faith in the system is admirable. It's dishonest.
Yeah, I was being polite. Admirable like the innocence of a child, or maybe more like the naïveté of a child.
Yeah, but how does this work in practice? They put cops in the door not letting her leave without signing? Did they say it's illegal for her to leave and she will be arrested if she does? I'm also curious.
They said Democrat reps are not allowed to leave without a 24/7 police escort. I'm sure there are cops at the door that will arrest them if they do not comply. I didn't find anything explicitly stating that in my 3 minutes of searching, but IMO it is abundantly clear that that is the case. There was a live stream of it all happening if you really want to know the details.
Technically, the executive branch can not say what is illegal or not. However, they control the police and can order them to do whatever or arrest you for whatever. Legal, illegal, constitutional, unconstitutional, whatever. Checks and balances kick in later. You can fight the legality of an arrest in court, but that is after you've been arrested, booked, and publicly shamed with a mugshot and whatnot. And you'll need to pay thousands of dollars to a lawyer to fight it, even if you are completely innocent or the arrest was completely illegal.
this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2025
350 points (100.0% liked)
politics
25300 readers
2456 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 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS