Anonymous #1 6d

Most of the people spewing about the deep state for the last 10 years have been actively supporting trump and his crew of pedos, so yea there’s a reason why we didn’t want to listen to you guys about the “deep state” when you were the ones propping it up!

3

Anonymous #2 6d

I always knew the deep state existed and that Trump was controlled opposition to it, so guess i'm just ahead of the curve or something

1

Anonymous #2 6d

Also you probably thought the deep state was a made up conspiracy theory until this year so don't get so full of yourself for (finally) figuring it out

1

Anonymous OP 6d

It’s hard to tell because DHS’ memo doesn’t actually state the legal basis for their decision. What they’re rolling back is their own policy and guidelines. It looks like court cases about this are mixed. Thus, this is probably going to get sued over. Already, districts in CA and MN have ruled that this isn’t allowed, but a district in TX has ruled that it’s ok. https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/can-ice-enter-a-home-to-make-an-arrest-with-only-an-administrative-warrant

1

Anonymous #3 6d

The relevant cases are: - Abel (1960), SCOTUS did not want to consider whether admin warrant was sufficient - Coolidge and Shadwick (1971 and 1972), SCOTUS said “issuing magistrate must be neutral and detached” - Malagerio (2021), NDTX basically said Abel might support using admin warrants, and defendant didn’t argue otherwise. 5th circuit affirmed but didn’t rule on the admin warrants

1

Anonymous #3 6d

- Payton (1980), SCOTUS says “judicial officer” needs to go between “zealous officer and the citizen” - Kidd (2024), CDCA cites Payton and says admin warrant is insufficient

1