113 pointsby theahura7 hours ago12 comments
  • gnabgib7 hours ago
    Small discussion earlier (18 points, 7 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46845610
  • chvid6 hours ago
    Since she was in her car they could have identified her by her car’s number plate - but facial recognition sounds scarier - which I guess is the point.
    • notepad0x906 hours ago
      it's not speculation, they specifically tell people that they're using facial recognition. They threaten protestors that they're entering them into a domestic terrorist database using facial recognition. They're arresting people and detaining them for long periods of time without due process, even while having proof of citizenship (real id, passports) on them, because of a facial recognition hit.
      • caminante6 hours ago
        >They threaten protestors that they're entering them into a domestic terrorist database using facial recognition.

        Is this in article? I figured it was using traveler photos stored in Customs/Border Patrol systems (e.g., Global Entry).

    • kmoser6 hours ago
      A plate identifies a car, not a driver.
      • rationalist5 hours ago
        With the protestors entering in rental car license plates of ICE or suspected ICE agents into their own database, I wouldn't want to rent a car anytime soon - the possibility of getting a car previously rented by ICE or suspected ICE, and being assaulted by having whistles blown in my ears, is off-putting.
        • fnordpiglet4 hours ago
          ICE routinely (and illegally) puts on fake plates, claiming sovereign immunity to violate state law.
        • mindslight4 hours ago
          It seems easy enough to not cover your face, not look like you're itching to kill someone, and honk your horn in support when you see some protestors. I'd be more worried that they had been smoking meth in the car.
        • rolph4 hours ago
          you know this sounds like a dystopian storyline.

          due to the vehicles recent usage:

          it starts with a rental car trip, an "incidental roadrage" incident while travelling, then the surveillance and whistle blowing starts at a rest stop, and then the complete lockout from any business, lodgings, or financial dealings.

          no fuel, no food no water...

          i wonder how the story ends.

      • caminante5 hours ago
        Unless you have permissive use or named drivers, the registered person should be driving the car.

        Besides, it's a good guess:

        >Hey Maggie

        >I'm not Maggie. I'm Sarah. Here's my ID. Maggie loaned me her car.

  • mcfunley6 hours ago
    By the time this is all said and done we’re going to wind down the DHS in its entirety, bogus lists of political enemies included
    • direwolf206 hours ago
      That won't happen. This only ends with the collapse of the country.
      • mfru4 hours ago
        Well, the rest of the world rejoices when that happens
      • etrautmann5 hours ago
        That’s not helpful
        • SilverElfin3 hours ago
          Maybe this is not helpful either, but I wonder if that person is correct. The national debt is already bad. With the trillions of new national debt from the Trump administration, and also the destruction of basically every foreign relationship, how will the country manage its finances? I feel like the only way out is to print money and cause extreme inflation. But that also means the death of the US dollar as the global reserve currency.
          • direwolf203 hours ago
            Look at any other country that went through a similar period. These regimes never voluntarily relinquish power, but they're forced to within 20 years due to some crushing military defeat, economic collapse, assassination, violent revolt, etcetera. It's never ended with a peaceful transition of power and a smooth winding down of the bad stuff.
      • valianteffort5 hours ago
        [flagged]
  • readams6 hours ago
    This is a bit thin to be drawing any conclusions. Only what one person claims. Has this happened to anyone else? Might there be another reason (that they're not telling us) that this happened?
  • dyauspitr6 hours ago
    The GOP is the party of censorship
    • AtlasBarfed6 hours ago
      I censor your censorship word and replace it with fascism
      • dns_snek3 hours ago
        That's not fair, it's only fascism after you build a death camp with a sign that says "fascist extermination camp" on it!

        Even then it's just one camp, it's not that bad. Real fascism is when you have hundreds.

  • SilverElfin7 hours ago
    Completely authoritarian and unacceptable. This entire saga shows the American political system has serious flaws where it cannot hold the executive branch accountable.
    • jaybrendansmith6 hours ago
      Agree. This is absolutely unacceptable by any measurement you can name. They are not respecting equality under the law, they are behaving like a terrorist regime. Every one of these people needs to be held accountable and prosecuted to the fullest extent the US Constitution allows. End of Story.
    • clipsy7 hours ago
      It's not "cannot" but "will not", and the flaw is not with the American political system but with the GOP and the American populace. Congress could absolutely rein this in at any time if Republicans in Congress cared to do so; the Supreme Court could rein this in at any time if the Republicans on the Supreme Court cared to do so. Do not let yourself be convinced that the problem is Trump or a too-powerful executive; the problem is an entire party and the people who cheerfully vote for it.
      • BrenBarn6 hours ago
        But neither congress nor the presidency is an accurate representation of the will of the people, and that is one of the flaws with the American political system.
      • SilverElfin6 hours ago
        I agree the voters and party are a problem, but disagree that we shouldn’t do more. We need better checks and balances on an administration that willfully and casually violates constitutional rights all the time. Not to mention the constant corruption and grifting that enriches the Trump family. We should have a system that can protect against this even when the majority makes a bad voting decision.
        • direwolf206 hours ago
          There were some. They all got dismantled. Loyalists have been systematically installed into all relevant positions. What system is immune to this? There is none. Voters have to take responsibility for what they voted for, which is the complete destruction of the United States of America as a political unit.
        • notarget1373 hours ago
          Goverment is corrupt. Solution - more goverment. Give me a brake.
      • zeroonetwothree6 hours ago
        SCOTUS can only rule on cases presented to it. AFAIK there has not been a relevant case submitted to them.
        • MengerSponge6 hours ago
          SCOTUS has already ruled on cases that were presented to them and now we're contending with a mad king.
        • bsder6 hours ago
          How on earth can you say that with a straight face?

          > Attached to this order is an appendix that identifies 96 court orders that ICE has violated in 74 cases. The extent of ICE’s noncompliance is almost certainly substantially understated. This list is confined to orders issued since January 1, 2026, and the list was hurriedly compiled by extraordinarily busy judges.

          > ICE has likely violated more court orders in January 2026 than some federal agencies have violated in their entire existence.

          Ref: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mnd.230...

          This is an official filing--facts, not a news report. A judge placed his job on the line and said these things in a written, filed, official ruling.

          The problem isn't judicial rulings; the problems are petulant bullies who simply ignore the rulings; and completely subservient sycophants who only can say "As you wish, master."

    • hackingonempty7 hours ago
      It is not a flaw but a choice made by the GOP.
      • BrenBarn6 hours ago
        The flaw is that they are able to make such a choice.
        • direwolf206 hours ago
          Every government is always able to turn totalitarian. That's why voting is important. You don't vote for the totalitarian.
          • jjav3 hours ago
            Well yes, but the US was supposed to have three separate branches of government to keep each other in check.

            Unfortunately turns out that in practice two of the three don't actually have any power at all when push comes to shove.

            • direwolf203 hours ago
              It was a long period of time voting for totalitarians. Checks and balances worked by design: preventing immediate radical changes. And they worked by design: allowing changes gradually over a period of time if people keep voting for the same thing. And now it's here.
      • foweltschmerz6 hours ago
        If it can be exploited by a bad actor, it is a flaw.
      • SpicyLemonZest6 hours ago
        This story in particular seems like a flaw. There should not be such a thing as a privilege that the executive branch can revoke with no explanation or process.
      • 6 hours ago
        undefined
    • nickff6 hours ago
      The American political system has definite problems, but so does every other system. If you rank democracies by any metric, the USA has done rather well, if not the best. If you disagree with that statement, I invite you to list the countries you consider democratic, in your order of ‘successfulness’.
      • kortex6 hours ago
        • amscanne6 hours ago
          LOL, the first list also seems to use the US as the cut-off & first country that is a “deficient democracy”. The magic number must be between somewhere between 0.811 and 0.821.

          Having spent a good chunk of my life in Canada and the US, a list that has Canada as more democratic doesn’t make any sense to me. In the end, it’s just a random mix of different measurements, weighted to tell whatever story you want to tell.

        • jjav3 hours ago
          See also this metric, showing how fast the US is falling away from a democracy:

          https://www.ft.com/content/b474855e-66b0-4e6e-9b73-7e252bd88...

        • beeflet6 hours ago
          looks like objective data to me. Look at our democracy number, it's lower than a ton of other countries!
        • nickff6 hours ago
          The Germans literally elected the Nazis, which resulted in the deaths of tens of millions, and you think they’re better at democracy?
          • vineyardmike6 hours ago
            > The Germans literally elected the Nazis... you think they’re better at democracy

            FYI - Germany changed their government after this regime fell, to ensure that it would become more democratic and harder to concentrate power in the executive. So they became more democratic as a learning process.

            The US had an actual civil war (over slavery no less) and didn't change anything fundamental about their constitution nor government structure as a result. It was less deadly than the holocaust, but enduring a civil war is not a sign of a functioning democracy.

          • defrost6 hours ago
            The US literally elected Trump.

            Not that they had a wide field of choice and not that they can actually fire him.

            Both reasons the US political system isn't all that great - it nosedived into a two party Hotelling's Law quagmire despite the founders being against party politics. It's hardly suprising a system centuries old and creaking failed to scale.

            Washminster systems are a literal reaction to the cracks in the Westminster and Washington systems.

            Maybe check those American Exceptionalism / Manifest Destiny blinkers and look about a little, it's hard to see out of a rut.

            • Diesel5555 hours ago
              Washington captured many issues of the party system in his farewell address. This can relate to many times in history for both parties.

              "They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force—to put in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party; often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common councils and modified by mutual interests. However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion."

              https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/resources/pdf/W...

              • defrost5 hours ago
                Nice quote, cheers for that.

                Ben Franklin on why the US Constitution is "Probably the best we can do for now" but will likely "fall to a Despot" is worth a revist in these Trumpian times.

          • SilverElfin6 hours ago
            Yes, and in part because of that. The way they teach history and make their citizens resistant to authoritarianism through schooling is different from the really basic ways history is taught in America.
          • HWR_146 hours ago
            The Germans have a new constitution and have kept the Nazis out of power with the new one.
            • direwolf206 hours ago
              So far. Between a quarter and a fifth of the country, however, currently votes for the Nazi party.
          • computerthings4 hours ago
            [dead]
  • AtlasBarfed6 hours ago
    The authoritarianism infrastructure was always there, it's been built for decades from red scare, McCarthyism, post 9/11 legislation, carnivore type monitoring with joke oversight, and now AI for the firehose.

    We are extremely lucky that this is the form of authoritarianism is currently being exerted.

    It could be so so so much worse

  • mindslight6 hours ago
    > The agent stated that I was impeding their work

    Note how these thugs just casually lie to create some fantasy narrative that runs completely counter to the ideas of the Constitution, an open society, and government responsible to The People. When the fascist talking heads get on TV and claim that agents had no choice but to execute another American because they were being "impeded", everyone would do well to remember how readily their whole organization characterizes passive and peaceful democratic activity as "impeding".

    • mannyv6 hours ago
      Technically, talking to and dealing with someone random instead of hunting their pray is literally impeding their work.

      Distractions are not serious until they are.

      • mindslight5 hours ago
        So they're impeding themselves because they're unable to perform their own jobs, which include accepting that they're accountable to citizens?
    • enrightened6 hours ago
      [flagged]
      • crooked-v6 hours ago
        The person in this case did neither, and in any case "shouting" at the government is fundamentally protected by the Constitution.
      • mindslight6 hours ago
        Grandpa, shut off the computer and go to bed. You're missing George Noory.
        • enrightened3 hours ago
          [flagged]
          • mindslight2 hours ago
            Uh-huh. I've got to love how half of you fascist apologists drop into broken English when pushed ("Not a loser like you living on dole"). I get it - you want to harm the United States and Grump is doing a great job at that.
      • SilverElfin6 hours ago
        Who’s the useful idiot for a hostile foreign power? Peter Thiel is likely a literal Russian agent, given the Epstein files mention he met with Russian officials and his handler at Epstein’s home. His buddies Elon Musk and David Sacks probably know this and are therefore also compromised, and shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near the government positions and contracts they have. Trump refused to ban TikTok despite the law requiring it and has generally been soft on China on many things. He also did nothing to stop Putin.

        Also you should know that Musk and Melania are both illegal immigrants who violated our laws. Yet you’re aligned with them and complain here about “illegals”.

        • enrightened3 hours ago
          If Musk or Melania have violated laws, let action be taken - I am not going to argue against it. Illegal immigration and economic migrants masquerading as refugees are a big threat to western nations and is setting the political discourse in many countries. Why do you think countries like Denmark, Norway, Sweden, are slowly changing their laws to make it easier to deport people? How are the hordes of unskilled economic migrants/illegals going to contribute to any modern economy? My belief is that a country should defend its borders with an iron hand, otherwise you’ll lose control pretty quickly.
  • decremental7 hours ago
    [dead]
  • slowmovintarget6 hours ago
    [flagged]
    • vineyardmike6 hours ago
      > The point of Global Entry is that Immigration and Customs Enforcement did a background check on you and decided you were cool

      Technically Global Entry is run by a different organization than ICE, but under the same parent organization. GE is run by "Customs and Border Protection", which is a sibling organization to ICE. Obviously it's all the US government, so it doesn't matter a ton...

      > well, your background just changed, didn't it?

      NO! This is an absolutely unreasonable take.

      The bigger issue is "When you demonstrate against them" is a protected action by our laws. So taking a legally protected action and expecting to keep your government entitlements is reasonable. This is entirely a non-essential scheme to help punish people for speaking out against ICE; they're just pulling all the levers they have.

      It is a reasonable assumption that the government would not declare you a higher-risk traveler because you attended a protest. Let's not pretend that this is reasonable behavior.

      • slowmovintarget4 hours ago
        It is not an unreasonable take.

        It also depends. Do you mean protesting by holding up a sign on the sidewalk and chanting. That's absolutely protected. Do you mean "protesting" where you obstruct ICE officers, throw things at their vehicles, create an "autonomous zone" and vandalize businesses? Because none of those things are actions that a reasonable citizen who is a low risk for reentry takes.

        Global Entry is a fast lane because they've evaluated the risk an individual poses. Someone who shows they're angry with the authorities also shows that the risk profile has changed. The fast lane at Immigration and Customs is not a right.

        • cthalupa3 hours ago
          > It is not an unreasonable take.

          Yes it is. Especially when this is all in context of the article, which you have either not read, willfully ignored the context within it, or somehow decided it is untrustworthy while providing no reasoning as to why.

          > Do you mean "protesting" where you obstruct ICE officers, throw things at their vehicles, create an "autonomous zone" and vandalize businesses? Because none of those things are actions that a reasonable citizen who is a low risk for reentry takes.

          We have no evidence the woman in the article did any of that. She was filming them in a public space.

          This is something the courts have ruled again and again and again is a protected 1A right. https://www.cato.org/commentary/dhs-says-videotaping-ice-age...

          We have seen DHS try to claim this is illegal repeatedly - as noted in this Cato Insitute article (hardly a left leaning institution!) - so there is no reason for us to disbelieve that they would take this stance.

          Why you think it is acceptable for a government agency to penalize you for holding them accountable with your first amendment right is beyond me. I would also suggest that it is inherently unamerican.

    • psyklic6 hours ago
      > Why would someone with GE expect to keep it?

      Peaceful protest is protected from retaliation by the First Amendment ...

      • HK-NC2 hours ago
        Isnt this the part where someone smugly says "freedom of assembly not freedom of consequences"
      • direwolf206 hours ago
        Which is now worth the paper it'd printed on.
    • beej716 hours ago
      > When you demonstrate against them, or do stuff like get in their way or block their agents...

      Or do anything they don't like, like look at them funny.

    • jjav3 hours ago
      > well, your background just changed, didn't it?

      The First Amendment is still in the constitution and has not been formally repealed (yet).

      So, no.

    • tayo426 hours ago
      Global entry is just a fast pass for getting through the border.

      I can't tell any difference between arriving with global entry or using the regular lane. Who ever is working the border asks the same dumb questions that they ask in the regular line.

      • cthalupa3 hours ago
        As someone who has traveled extensively with and without GE, your experience is extremely atypical. Not just for myself, not just for people I am acquainted with, but for all of the people I see in the customs lines and watching the speed of the lines. When I was dating a woman who was not a citizen, if we were returning internationally she would have me go through the GE line to go get the car, etc., and I would regularly have gotten through, walked to the car, loaded my luggage, and driven back around to arrivals and still had time to kill while waiting for her to arrive.

        This is perhaps the first time in my life I've heard of someone saying that they haven't seen a difference after acquiring GE.

      • slowmovintarget6 hours ago
        That's not true. I have Global Entry, and it is dramatically faster. I've not even had to break stride walking past the entry agent.
        • tayo426 hours ago
          How can you say that's not true when Ive crossed the border and been asked the same silly questions they ask on the regular line? Its just faster because the line is shorter.
          • mannyv6 hours ago
            I have GE and haven't even talked to an agent in the last four entries. The last time I didn't have to claim my baggage which was really strange (YVR).
          • cthalupa3 hours ago
            That would still be a benefit even if that was the case, but I frequently do not have to say a word beyond "hello" or "have a good one" to the border agent.
      • xenospn4 hours ago
        Can you tell the difference between stopping at a red light and driving through a green light?