Domestic Enemies to the Constitution of the United States show absolute disdain for the first amendment, calling it "crap" and claiming free speech is harassment and claim a public area is restricted.

It's our RIGHT be on publicly owned/government property open to the public, it's our RIGHT to record there and anything we can see (including in cars and license plates), it's our RIGHT to verbally oppose and challenge their actions without thereby risking arrest, and it can't be turned into a crime.

These domestic enemies in badges are A DIRECT THREAT TO MY FAMILIES LIFE, LIBERTY, and PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS.

>>24139683

When will Noem be arrested for conspiracy against rights?

>>24139704

Do you enjoy playing your little bit part?

AL COPS think property owner is burglar, bust in with NO WARRANT, Shoot him, He shoots back… They REFUSE to release bodycam.

They are domestic enemies to the Constitution of the United States and should be treated as enemy combatants on US Soil

>>24139794

4th Amendment applies to all persons, not just citizens, and when you walk up to someone demanding papers, you don't know if they're a citizen.

>>24139802

Do you enjoy lying and talking out of your ass in this little bit part?

>>24139808

He knows, he's just "stirring the waters"

>>24139825

Which they do not have for "papers please!" based on being brown.

>>24139837

No it's not false kek it's long established law.

>>24139920

>"All tyrannies rule through fraud and force, but once the fraud is exposed they must rely

>exclusively on force."

>- George Orwell

>>24139925

Demanding ID without reasonable articulable suspicion based on totality of cirumstances and objective facts combined in which "you're brown" isn't enough.

What you're doing is an attack on my and others 4th amendment rights, you are a threat to our rights and should be treated as an enemy to the Constitution and We the People it represents.

>>24139925

Being in the US "illegally" is civil. It's the manner of entry that's criminal.

>>24139936

>Demanding ID without reasonable articulable suspicion based on totality of cirumstances and objective facts combined in which "you're brown" isn't enough.

Oops didn't realize I cut that off…

Demanding ID without reasonable articulable suspicion based on totality of circumstances and objective facts combined in which "you're brown" isn't enough, is a FEDERAL CRIME ITSELF.

>>24139948

What reasonable articulable suspicion do you believe exists to ask people to prove citizenship, based on a totality of circumstances and combined objective facts… to believe someone is illegal and not lawfully in the country?

>>24139954

Yep.

>>24139962

Like I said… the manner of entry, but being here is civil.

>>24139972

Civil Violations (Unlawful Presence)

Definition: Simply remaining in the U.S. longer than your visa allows or entering without inspection.

Consequence: Removal (deportation) proceedings, fines, and future bars (e.g., 3 or 10 years) from legally re-entering the U.S..

Not a Crime: The Supreme Court has affirmed that this civil infraction is not criminal punishment, though some states have tried to criminalize it.

Criminal Violations (Illegal Entry/Re-entry)

Illegal Entry (8 U.S.C. § 1325): Entering the U.S. at a time or place not designated by immigration officers, or making false statements to enter. This is a federal misdemeanor or felony depending on the offense.

Illegal Re-entry (8 U.S.C. § 1326): Re-entering the U.S. after being previously deported or removed. This is a serious federal felony.

Key Distinction:

Civil: Staying too long or entering without inspection (deportation is the main penalty).

Criminal: The act of crossing unlawfully or re-crossing after deportation (jail time, fines, deportation).

Prosecuting People for Coming to the United States

Physical presence in the United States without proper authorization is a civil violation, rather than a criminal offense.

>>24139975

>>24139985

>>24140001

Did Biden let them in or they broke in?

>>24140011

There's also plenty of vid of law enforcement violating the US Constitution…

>>24140031

What reasonable articulable suspicion do you have to believe they're here illegally, based on a totality of circumstances and combined objective facts… and NOT someone legally and lawfully in the country?

>>24140052

That's 1.

Totality of circumstances.

>>24140053

If money is ones God…

>>24140064

I don't give a flying fuck if they don't have a problem with it, some citizens, including myself do, and as far as I'm concerned those who want to deprive my rights are a DIRECT THREAT.

>>24140066

>>24140081

I didn't say anything against deporting "illegals", but violating rights to do it, both citizen AND aliens rights, makes one a domestic enemy to the Constitution of the United States and my rights ARE NOT UP FOR DEBATE.

Anyone conspiring against rights or depriving rights under color of law is a criminal and should be treated as a domestic enemy combatant on US soil.

Clear enough?

>>24140102

More projection and lies.

>>24140104

The bible is an incomplete collection of scripture put together by the very people Jesus warned about. He said seek and you will find, not that it would be put together in one book for your reading convenience.

>>24140125

When Jesus tells them they don't know the scriptures and there will be no marriage in the resurrection… where is the scripture he's referencing in your bible?