this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2026
263 points (99.6% liked)

politics

28448 readers
2696 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The real question is whether cops are willing to enforce this — in most places they've refused to arrest ICE or Border Patrol for on-duty actions except in cases of nepotism.

top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] human@slrpnk.net 34 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I just hope DHS isn't willing to break any laws. /j

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 40 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The big question isn't whether they'll break the law: it's whether they've alienated the local police enough that they'll do something besides look the other way.

[–] human@slrpnk.net 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If the Minneapolis local authorities can't get access to investigate ICE murder scenes I'm not optimistic that St. Paul cops will get much traction getting individual storm troupers to remove masks or pay fines.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

I'm picturing something like:

[–] NekoKoneko@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Per the local government's ordinance summary, this is a criminal ordinance and it's effective 30 days after passage, signature by mayor and publication in the City's newspaper. So soonest will be late March.

I agree the question is whether the cops will enforce, but regardless, it should be done. And it gives a clear tool to local leaders to (hopefully, finally) flip the switch and start arresting ICE for criminal acts, since whatever Stephen Miller says, ICE does not have "absolute immunity" to break the law, much less violate the Constitution.

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

It also sets a template for how other cities can pre-emptively ICE proof themselves.

It's pretty widely acknowledged, even by ICE and DHS, that most agents would basically rather quit than work unmasked. They know they're pariahs. Anonymity is the only protection they have.

[–] NekoKoneko@lemmy.world 2 points 10 hours ago

Yeah, it's such a simple psychological judo move to force them not to wear masks. I really think it would be extremely effective in preventing a lot of violence.

[–] Steve@startrek.website 6 points 1 day ago

Too bad they cant make a law against murder

[–] doingthestuff@lemy.lol 3 points 1 day ago

They'll just say the city doesn't have authority and that it's unenforceable.

[–] doug@lemmy.today 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Watch another plague breakout just so they have an excuse to wear them again 😩 (not that the first one ever ended)

current plague is: ringworm