NEW: @ACLU obtained ICE's "Alien Enemies Act Validation Guide," confirming all it takes to be sent to rot in prison in El Salvador is 1) having a tattoo an ICE officer says is a "gang tattoo" and 2) displaying "logos," "symbols," or clothes an ICE officer says are gang signs.
In order for ICE to declare someone an "Alien Enemy," ICE must first determine they are a Venezuelan over age 14, and then second find 8 points on a scoring guide they made up.
It's 4 points for having alleged gang tattoos and 4 points for displaying gang "logos" or "symbols."
This checklist is shocking. A person can be declared an "Alien Enemy" based ONLY on communications with someone ICE says is a member, and nothing more.
6 points for texting a "known member of TDA" + 3 points for Venmoing or CashApping a "known member" = 9 points = TDA member.
One thing on this checklist even violates the AEA proclamation itself -- which applies ONLY to "members" of the gang.
By assigning 10 points to this category, a person who admits to being an "associate" (not the same as a member!) is automatically deemed a member anyway.
By far the most terrifying part of this checklist is the "Association" and "Symbolism" section.
Many experts say TdA does NOT use tattoos or gang signs like some other groups. And some of the tattoos ICE claims are "TDA tattoos" are things many innocent people have, like roses.
Imagine a guy's roommate is someone ICE says is a TDA member.
- 2 points for "residing" with him
- 2 points for "closely associating" with him
- 2 points for being in a "group photo"
- 2 points for "social media posts" with him.
= 8 points = sent to prison in El Salvador.
With this checklist, ICE can declare any Venezuelan an "Alien Enemy" without ANY concrete evidence -- based solely on an ICE officer's interpretation of tattoos and hand signs, or the bad luck of having a roommate ICE thinks is TDA.
This is why due process matters!
One final thing to flag: a person doesn't even need to hit 8 points to be declared a TDA member! The form itself says once a person hits 6 or higher points, a supervisor can sign off and declare the person a TDA member.
So JUST texting someone ICE says is TDA could be enough.
Adding some more context here: The huge problem with a lot of these is the subjectivity. The document listed above includes an ICE list of what some Tren de Aragua "identifiers" may be.
So wearing a Michael Jordan jersey can get you halfway to being deemed a TDA member!
Adding more here on the TdA "gang tattoos" concept.
It turns out that ICE's own internal guidance on what a "TdA tattoo" looks like actually stole random pictures of tattoos off the internet which had nothing to do with Tren de Aragua in the first place.
Today the Supreme Court hears a case that will decide the fate of over 350,000 people currently living legally in the United States — and impact thousands more who are still in limbo.
So what is Temporary Protected Status and what is the case about? NEW 🧵 on the issue.
Temporary Protected Status was created to deal with the fact that sometimes, due to an outbreak of war, political crisis, or natural disaster, deportation becomes inhumane.
Without a law to address this, presidents responded on an ad hoc basis using inherent executive authority.
Before TPS, Presidents used a thing called "extended voluntary departure" to address these crisis. For example:
- Ford gave EVD to Lebanese in 1976 due to civil war
- Carter gave EVD to Ugandans in 1978 due to civil war
- Reagan gave EVD to Poles in 1981 due to Soviet crackdowns
From FY 2021 through FY 2024, roughly 3.5 million people became U.S. citizens through naturalization. The idea that Biden is somehow personally responsible if any of them later went on to commit crimes is beyond stupid; it's willfully ignorant and deliberately inflammatory.
Neither @nypost or @DHSgov has EVER blamed Trump for any crimes committed by an immigrant who entered the country or got status under Trump. Not once.
It's because they KNOW it's not a good faith argument.
Wait, sorry, so now the Trump admin is attempting to strip green cards from people just because of who their families are?! And people are cheering this on?
People with DACA came here as children. Every one of them has been here for a minimum 19 years. They grew up here. They went to school here. Many speak English with no accent. They are working legally, paying taxes, doing everything right.
Because that's not something a President can do. Only Congress can provide a path to permanent legal status for most DACA recipients. And Congress has sat on its ass for years, even though huge majorities of the American public supports the DREAM Act.
In 2018, the Supreme Court said DACA might be legal if it only protected against deportation, not provided work permits. The 5th Circuit, the most conservative in the country, upheld that version and limited their ruling only to Texas (the plaintiff).
Here I was thinking that what mattered was every single judge who has ruled on the issue, 125+ years of accepted understanding of the 14th, and centuries of common law on the contours of jus soli. But if you have SEVEN law professors, man, WOW.
Less sarcastically, this article has a GLARING flaw: dual citizenship. Many children of U.S. citizens acquire foreign citizenship at birth under jus sanguinis and so would not have an "exclusive" allegiance to the US under this theory. That can't be right.
If "exclusive allegiance" is required, then how could that cover Wong Kim Ark himself, who was a dual national?
Hamburger's answer is that U.S. law at the time did not recognize dual nationality. That's a bizarre answer that raises more questions than it answers.
The overwhelming majority of Americans (polls show over 80%) oppose the deportation of people like this woman. In every previous administration, including Trump's first, this woman would not have been a priority for enforcement.
You can't get a fiancé visa from inside the country, and thanks to failed laws Congress passed 30 years ago, getting a green card through her husband could be either near-impossible or could take 3-5 years minimum. It's not as simple as most people think.
In 1996, Congress said that people wanting to get a green card through a US citizen spouse, who had originally entered illegally, had to leave the US and get a visa, which triggers a 10-year ban on reentry.