Last June, two investigators employed by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) showed up at David Streever’s house in Rochester, New York. Streever was not home, so they left him a note.
That note, presented as an official warning from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), is at the center of a First Amendment lawsuit that Streever filed last month, alleging that ICE agents investigated and threatened him based on his constitutionally protected criticism of their boss. This month, the government responded to Streever’s lawsuit, confirming his allegations while attempting to rebut them.
For more information, either visit the article directly or view the post with quotes in !crimes_of_ice@lemmy.4d2.org
Criticizing a government agency is NOT probable cause to investigate someone in the US, as per the Courts going back decades. It’s not reasonable suspicion either.
Your comment conflating confessing to murder with criticizing the government is frankly [redatcted.]
Well huh, you sure are confident! Given how often I fact check other people on here, I’d be the queen of hypocrites if I didn’t welcome it when it happens to me. So go on, please tell me all about these mysterious decades of court rulings that broadly apply evidentiary standards to the opening of an investigation. I do hope it’s not something like Cornell v US, that sure would be a letdown after such a bold and assertive assertion of falsehood.
Aaaanyways, I’ll just sit here patiently while you get that all together, no rush. In your own time. When you’re ready. You got this, champ.
I believe it was after 9/11 they were surveilling Muslims for first amendment protected activity and the courts told the FBI to fuck off and that they needed a real reason. They reference that ruling in the news regularly as it comes up every so often.
My goodness, how fascinating! And here I was, laboring under the apparently false notion that warranted exceptions to the 4th amendment are just one small aspect of the investigatory process (which is itself an aspect of the criminal legal process), but that in of themselves they do not inherently constitute the whole of an investigation.
Goodness me though, now that you’ve dropped such persuasive evidence of my total lack of understanding I might even fall to questioning everything I know. Is up, down? Is black, white? My god, the impact of such a sincerely held belief relayed by someone with such swaggering confidence, well that’s just too much to ignore!