(07-28-2019 10:37 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-28-2019 10:29 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-28-2019 08:48 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-28-2019 12:02 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  [quote='tanqtonic' pid='16213394' dateline='1564275488']

God god dude. When someone --- anyone ---- comes across a border and there is *any* question that there is a 'second identity', wtf do you think they should do? Let them go with a pinkie promise?

I seem to read about actual fing terrorists whose MO has a valid ID, and false cover.

Jeezus Krist dude. I dont give a **** what your rush to judgement is here (that is your rush to indict Orange policy in particular) but the actual fing mission of the Border Patrol is to be on the lookout for *just that situation*.

At a checkpoint within the prescribed distance from the border, the Border Patrol has pretty much carte blanche to ask anything, or look for anything.

These kids came through, they were asked questions, then they were asked for ID. The kid who was detained ID, when run popped up with something very out of the ordinary.

Seems pretty simple to me. Or keep your SJW jousting suit on. No skin off my back.


Depends on why he thinks the license is forged. If he accesses a history at the stop that shows you are a felon, probably a good reason. That is more apropos to the situation described.

Not only that, but you utterly ignore the fact this was a stop and search incident to a border crossing. At an immigration checkpoint within the prescribed distance from the border that the Supreme Court has given a green light to. Criminy, in that situation they can put on the gd rubber gloves and make you sign alto with almost zero justification at that type of stop.

Again, put your thinking cap on first, before getting hot and bothered about the stop. Good god, they even ask *me* for ID from time to time at the immigration stops coming out of El Paso.

Two things - I don’t believe this was a stop at a border crossing, but I could be wrong. I believe this was an immigration station within the US, so they weren’t coming across a border and you suggest.

There is no fundamental difference legally. *If* the immigration checkpoint is within X (iirc 100) miles of a border, the stop is as essentially though they were crossing a border for most intents and purposes.

(Actually I will disagree with myself, because that is the practice that is employed, but I do think there is a difference within the Supreme Court case on this point and actual practice. I've never had it tested because my new found (2 years or so) refusals to answer questions typically end after 20 min. The bar card that is right next to my drivers license in the wallet probably helps with that when I am asked for ID, though...)

But, in defense of the opposite sense, while I have very serious doubts about your issue on the properness of the actual search issue (i.e. how far the agents at a checkpoint can search), I would like to know what led to the 23 days. That seems excessive to me. But, we do not know *any* of the facts regarding that length.

Not sure why you doubt my issue of the properness of the search - I find these interior border points to be a complete invasion of privacy when they cast such a wide net that they capture US citizens who haven’t even crossed the border. The fact that I never went into Mexico during each Spring Break, but was required to stop, answer questions, show identification, and open my trunk for inspection, seems to be an abuse of power. Seems like an unreasonable search, but they are legal (or at least I assume they are, as I have to imagine there have been lawsuits trying to stop them already).

Because the scope is allowed, perhaps. For pretty good reasons. Allows the immigration authorities at least some leeway to do a 'chokepoint' strategy. I dont mind the minimalist strategy that it allows.

They are free to stop and ask questions.
Next time dont open your trunk. Hilarity ensues.
Next time dont answer their questions. Hilarity ensues.

But if you do answer their questions, and sound evasive, they just might reasonable probable cause for more.

The funny thing is that for the trunk open, *you* consented, didnt you? So, since you consented, if I were you I wouldnt ***** about it too much.

But they do have the right to stop and ask questions at checkpoints. *You* have the right not to answer. The brothers had the right *not* to.

They do have the right to ask for ID in that situation. One brother had zero corroborating ID as to his identity. Insto presto probable cause for the entire gang. End of story.

Turns out the brother was illegally in the United States, and self-deported. Sounds to me that at that checkpoint, the officers were doing their job.

Ask a legal question, get zero tangible response, and that discrepancy at that minute gives them sufficient probable cause to run the car and occupants. Subsequent physical and electronic search yields even more questions on the guy in question.

Quote:I agree about the 23 days. My guess is it was due to the issue of the travel visa, which definitely brought in a serious suspicion of citizenship. I just want to know when that was found, because it is the only evidence that really justifies any detainment by CBP.

Easy to answer.


As a child, he moved to Mexico with his family and later returned to the US as a teenager. He says he was carrying his state ID, a Social Security card and a wallet-sized birth certificate.

The facts
https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/25/us/us-cit...index.html

Quote:He also had a Mexican tourist visa with him that inaccurately listed his country of birth as Mexico, setting up a conflicting nationality claim, his attorney, Claudia Galan, said.

Both brothers were detained, and Marlon Galicia, who does not have legal status in the US, was retuned to Mexico.

Car checkpoint. Legal and proper.
Questions asked. Legal and proper.

Questions answered in a dodgey manner? Probably given the older brother was illegal.

Ask for ID. Legal and proper.

Older brother has garbage ID for purposes since he is illegal.

Authorities ask to search. Consent granted, most likely.

Search of wallet yields conflicting nationality information.

Brother ID'd as illegal.

All are detained.

I dont see anything at issue with that progression.

Quote:It sounds like you’re also generally wary of this government organization having the ability to ask for one’s papers wherever and whenever, and detain them without question. And this sounds like this may be a case similar to that.

I can see a case where reasonable probable cause got hit in a heartbeat here.