662
Don’t Stop at ICE, Says Progressive Dem: Abolish the Department of Homeland Security (theintercept.com)
submitted 2 days ago by to c/politics@lemmy.world
79 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Rep. Delia Ramirez is expected to introduce a bill to abolish the Department of Homeland Security and eliminate all immigrant detention in the United States on Tuesday, the Illinois Democrat shared exclusively with The Intercept.

The Reimagining Safety Act would repeal “duplicative and overreaching terrorism laws,” according to the bill summary and text, and curtail the widespread surveillance state that emerged in the wake of 9/11 terror attacks.

It comes the day after agents from Homeland Security Investigations searched the home of Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., in what the Department of Justice has described as an opaque “federal criminal investigation.” HSI is a component of Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, the agency at the center of mounting concerns about the violent weaponization of DHS against immigrants and the Trump administration’s perceived political enemies.

The sweeping legislation faces long odds in Congress, but Ramirez argues that strictly limiting the government’s immigration enforcement apparatus is critical for public safety in the wake of yet another shooting by federal immigration agents.

...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Sounds radical.

But I can't think of a single reason why we shouldn't abolish DHS

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    Homeland Security was a Bush Administration creation too, in the wake of 9/11 that they used to do things they long wanted.

    Just as they submitted the patriot act like 10 days after, a thousand page law referencing other laws, something that would take years to create. They had it already, that was their wish list.

    Homeland Security denies the Bill of Rights applies to them, and should be abolished.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    The next time there's a 9/11 blowback on our soil, they won't have pre drafted the patriot act 2.0.

    They'll just ask Grok to draft it, and all the Reps will pass it, after having had Grok read it for them. Then it will pass, hallucinations and all, without anyone having actually read it in full.

    And then, years later, judges will ask Grok how we should interpret it, when deciding if the countless human rights violations were legal under it

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago

    Ha ha, it sounds all too plausible I'm afraid, meaning it's not stupid enough for what will happen in the future, sorry, I don't make the rules.

    But we are on the Patriot Act III now, they did II just a year or two after the first one. But, as the aforementioned rule suggested, they will likely name it something much more stupid. We are like the reverse of the improvement curve of computer chips fitting more transistors onto a chip.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent