Thinking about the moment earlier today in #Sarita#Texas at CBP checkpoint, about 85-100 miles from the US-Mexico border, depending on map. It was on US Highway 77. CBP agent asked the routine question, Are you a citizen of the US? I refused to answer.
He asked again. I told him that I didn't need to answer, He asked me again, I said I am not answering.
His supervisor came and asked me what I do. I said I was a journalist. He asked me where I was born. I said that I don't have to answer that. I know my rights.
(As I talked with the CBP agents, I was every aware of my privilege, unlike others who don't have that privilege).
The supervisor cited the court case that said it gave CBP jurisdiction to stop people and ask about their citizenship within a 100-mile radius of any border in the US. I said I was very aware of that case and said that you are still infringing my rights.
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated,..."
"...and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
He then told me to pull over while they ran a check on the car. I told him then that the car is a rental and that I am a journalist who was driving from McAllen to Houston. And that I am in the USA right now and have rights.
It was then when he touched the back door of the car and peered into the car. I told him politely that he needs to back away from the car. I asked him, why am I being stopped? He didn't answer.
5 minutes later (and it was a long 5 minutes), he came up to my window and said I could leave. I thanked him but also told him that he had no right to pull me over and no right to ask about my citizenship.
The convo never got heated, never tense. It was polite, but I felt at the moment that this BP agent was trying to find something to give him cause. Again, I know that I was in a big position of privilege here.
I also know that many people each and every dsy have to go through checkpoints like these that are within the 100-mile radius from the border. I have had to do this in past as well, but this is the first time I am public about it.
I also think that we as Americans don't think about our rights in these moments. I know it is so much safer to just say, yes, I am a US citizen and move on. But to me, this is a bigger issue.
If we really value freedom, why are we letting CBP feel like it can stop people within this 100-mile radius. That would mean that anyone in say, Florida or Michigan could be stopped and asked about their citizenship status. Both states near borders. (Image via @ACLU)
I also wonder how we would feel as a country if say, there were CBP checkpoints in DC suburbs, for example. Those places are less than 100 miles from border.
If we truly value our individual rights aa Americans, why are we ok with this practice? This is a serious question. Would like to know.
This @reason video is actually quite clever about checkpoint rights
This is a real one
Another one here:
And to be clear, I am not advocating for people to start doing this, but just that people should know how these checkpoints operate.
And I know that CBP supervisor (Latino BTW) we doing his job but I also think that the burden of proof needs to be on him and not me. I was not charged with anything. I was stopped for no reason.
This one got 4 million views
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Remember that take from 2014 by @nytimes from @Nate_Cohn and his editor @DLeonhardt that insisted that more and more US Latinos were identifying as white?
What the story didn't include is the correspondence I had with @LeoShane and other committee members who were asked specifically about what was said about @PabloReports and what does being "too visible" mean. I will likely share those responses later since it was all on record.
We know that committee members complained about the work of a Latino journalist but they will now deny it.
After just 1 month of getting a temporary pass to cover Congress for @latinorebels, @PabloReports's pass has not been extended. Been working hard with Pablo to get it renewed even to point of having @SpeakerPelosi's office intervene. They actually tried to help. #LatinoRebelsDCC
I am beyond upset because the mostly white Periodical Gallery committee gave us the runaround and also lied to us. I was told in a phone call by the person who helps coordinate the committee that @PabloReports was seen as being "too visible" during his one month of coverage.
Was also told that committee members complained that @PabloReports was there all the time covering Congress and that they didn't expect him to do so much work.
In my latest opinion piece for @PostOpinions, I chronicle the last week of immigration coverage from major US news outlets and why I decided to not publish certain @AP stories at @latinorebels (part o @futuromedia).
In that piece, I found out that the @AP was addressing some of the words used in certain stories. They went on the record with me and also shared an internal memo about their recent decisions regarding immigration stories.
In the interest of informing the public and being fully transparent as a way to inform other editors, this is the internal memo I received from the @AP (4 tweets to follow).
Subject: From the Standards Center: A note about the current increase in border entrances