- Joined
- Sep 22, 2018
- Messages
- 42,217
- Location
- Moonbase Caligula
- SL Rez
- 2008
- Joined SLU
- 2009
- SLU Posts
- 55565
Immigrants waiting to complete their naturalization ceremony were turned away at Faneuil Hall, after being told their oath-taking would now be canceled.
"People are in limbo, understandably," said Project Citizenship Executive Director Gail Breslow. "They're confused, they're anxious, they're scared."
Project Citizenship represents a woman from Haiti who was pulled out of line and asked where she was from.
"Anyone who answered a particular country was pulled out of line and told their oath ceremony was canceled," Breslow said.
The Trump administration is slapping a $5,000 "apprehension fee" on migrants without legal status, a top Border Patrol official announced.
U.S. Border Patrol Chief Michael Banks said the charge will apply to people apprehended after crossing the border between ports of entry, expanding the financial penalties tied to unauthorized entry.
The fee, he said, will be imposed on individuals age 14 and older who are taken into custody after entering the United States unlawfully. The fee stems from provisions contained in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), which was passed by the GOP-controlled Congress earlier this year.
As noted elsewhere on the internets, this is likely the groundwork for putting them into forced labor aka slavery, in that they will not be released until their debt is paid off, requiring most of them to work at astonishingly low paying activities."This message applies to all illegal aliens—regardless of where they entered, how long they’ve been in the U.S., their current location, or any ongoing immigration proceedings," Banks wrote in a post on X.
I know if I skip a meeting to get to another meeting that turned out to be cancelled, I would have just headed home for the remainder of the day, too.Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem was accused of misleading House Homeland Security Committee members when she said she was departing a Thursday hearing early to attend another meeting that was actually canceled.
It’s an assertion denied by Noem’s office, which said she only found out her meeting was canceled after she left the witness table.
Bonus points if she is escorted out by police dog.Meanwhile, it sure is looking like Noem is on a trajectory that will take her out of the administration. Soon, I hope.
All the points if the dog is armed.Bonus points if she is escorted out by police dog.
Man Charged for Wiping Phone Before CBP Could Search It![]()
US plans to start checking all tourists' social media
The potential social media mandate being proposed by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) would apply to anyone visiting, whether they require a visa or not.share.google
A man in Atlanta has been arrested and charged for allegedly deleting data from a Google Pixel phone before a member of a secretive Customs and Border Protection (CBP) unit was able to search it, according to court records and social media posts reviewed by 404 Media. The man, Samuel Tunick, is described as a local Atlanta activist in Instagram and other posts discussing the case.
The exact circumstances around the search—such as why CBP wanted to search the phone in the first place—are not known. But it is uncommon to see someone charged specifically for wiping a phone, a feature that is easily accessible in some privacy and security-focused devices.
X10 bonus points if armed dog is named Final Boss.All the points if the dog is armed.
A Chinese man who left his country after filming at sites of alleged human rights violations against Uyghurs now faces the risk of removal from the United States, according to his lawyer and mother.
Guan Heng, 38, underwent an immigration hearing in New York on Monday after being detained by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in August, his mother said in an interview.
The case could see him taken out of the United States and potentially landing back in China eventually.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2025/dec/17/immigration-lawyer-trumpYou grew up in a family that valued helping others, in a California town with a multicultural heritage where classrooms taught in English and Spanish. As an American, it breaks your heart to see what your country has come to. It feels like you’re in a bizarre alternate universe where the law doesn’t apply anymore.
A federal jury has acquitted a South L.A. man who was charged with stealing government property by towing an immigration agent’s vehicle during the arrest of a TikTok influencer in downtown Los Angeles earlier this year.
Bobby Nunez was arrested Sept. 2 after he was accused of interfering with the detainment of Tatiana Mafla-Martinez while she live-streamed her Aug. 15 arrest. Video of the incident showed an SUV being towed away from the parking garage of the Da Vinci Apartments, where Martinez is being pinned to the ground by agents.
The SUV was one of two vehicles being used to box in Martinez’s car and prevent her from escaping the luxury apartment complex, according to an affidavit filed with the complaint. Nunez was 33 at the time of the incident, and Martinez was 23.
After a four-day trial and more than three hours of deliberation, the jury found Nunez not guilty of one count of theft of government property Friday, according to the U.S. attorney’s office, which declined to comment on the verdict. He had faced up to 10 years in prison, if convicted.

How does the law on auto theft work in the US?![]()
Jury acquits L.A. man who towed immigration agent's car during TikTok influencer’s arrest
A federal jury has acquitted Bobby Nunez, who was charged with stealing government property by towing an immigration agent’s vehicle during the arrest of a TikTok influencer in downtown L.A.www.latimes.com
![]()
Because of the requirement that the defendant intends permanently to deprive the other of their property, there's a separate section to cover simply taking someone's vehicle without their consent without any intention of permanently depriving them of it, or making it very unlikely they'll ever get it back.A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it; and “thief” and “steal” shall be construed accordingly.
Since the report tells us thata person shall be guilty of an offence if, without having the consent of the owner or other lawful authority, he takes any conveyance for his own or another’s use or, knowing that any conveyance has been taken without such authority, drives it or allows himself to be carried in or on it.
it's clear Mr Nunez did not intend to deprive the government of the vehicle for any length of time, simply to stop it blocking the driveway, so I'm wondering if "theft of government property" wasn't an elementary charging error, as it would have been in the UK.During the trial, the defense attorneys argued that the law enforcement vehicle was blocking the driveway to the complex and their client had moved it around the corner — just one block away. They said that the car was returned within 13 minutes.
It was a "charging error" in the same vein that Letitia James is facing a "charging error."it's clear Mr Nunez did not intend to deprive the government of the vehicle for any length of time, simply to stop it blocking the driveway, so I'm wondering if "theft of government property" wasn't an elementary charging error, as it would have been in the UK.
It was basically the feds throwing spaghetti against the wall in hopes of something sticking. A legal temper tantrum, if you will.How does the law on auto theft work in the US?
I ask because, in the UK, the Theft Act 1968 defines theft thus:
Because of the requirement that the defendant intends permanently to deprive the other of their property, there's a separate section to cover simply taking someone's vehicle without their consent without any intention of permanently depriving them of it, or making it very unlikely they'll ever get it back.
Since the report tells us that
it's clear Mr Nunez did not intend to deprive the government of the vehicle for any length of time, simply to stop it blocking the driveway, so I'm wondering if "theft of government property" wasn't an elementary charging error, as it would have been in the UK.
It certainly doesn't look like theft to me, as clearly it didn't to the jury.