The First Bill Sent to Pres 47 Should Be Titled "Invite Violence Against Non-Citizens Act"

This article started out from reading out the passage by Congress of the "Laken Riley Act"

Commentary by Dana Chasin of 2020visiondc.org

I missed an implication of this bit: "expanding detainable offenses to include ... any crime that causes bodily harm". Self-defense is an affirmative legal defense, which is presented in response to the charge of assault or aggravated assault. This bill essentially declares an open season of civilian violence upon [any person not a citizen or national of the United States], since the condition for a "shall issue" detainer is merely "is charged with, is arrested for, is convicted of, admits having committed, or admits committing acts which constitute the essential elements".

Engaging is violence or even allegedly admitting to having done so even in self defense will result in "effective and expeditious" detainment.

Furthermore, the bill adds

(2) DEFINITION.—For purposes of paragraph (1)(E), the terms ‘burglary’, ‘theft’, ‘larceny’, ‘shoplifting’, ‘assault of a law enforcement officer’, and ‘serious bodily injury’ have the meanings given such terms in the jurisdiction in which the acts occurred.
(3) DETAINER.—The Secretary of Homeland Security shall issue a detainer for an alien described in paragraph (1)(E) and, if the alien is not otherwise detained by Federal, State, or local officials, shall effectively and expeditiously take custody of the alien.

Which allows a local jurisdiction the leniency to draft misdemeanors named ‘burglary’, ‘theft’, ‘larceny’, ‘shoplifting’ which would then compel detainment by federal forces. Which one look at the history of loitering, vagrancy, and Black codes in this country suggests will absolutely be abused. Especially if there are kickbacks from the private contractors that DHS will be partnering with to provide the detainment facilities.

This bill is absolutely an attack on the concept of due process of law. Detainment and detention are a tried and true method of separating people from their legal representation, family, and community. Doing so decreases the chances of successful defense in court. It is especially challenging to fight an allegation of what one has said ("admitted to") without having even a criminal charge or arrest to establish the paper trail and legal grounding. What would it look like for a non-citizen from Vermont to fight their detention in Arizona when they were shipped there based on an allegation that they'd admitted to having shoplifted an item in Florida during their Disney trip? Or some Red Cap drops an item into a purse and calls attention to the victim leaving the store?

A terrible series of events in a hostile local jurisdiction, which just requires one police collaborator, would be for a Red Cap to trigger a shoplifting incident and then claim to perform a so-called "citizen's arrest" if they can't get support from a staff member. Resisting the illegal detainment would risk the trap of being accused of assault while accepting the wait for the police collaborator to arrive and notify DHS.

But wait, the new (E)(i) limits this handling to "Inadmissible aliens"!

Lets delve into what (6)(A), (6)(C), or (7) of 212(a) means:

• (6) Illegal entrants and immigration violators

• (A) Aliens present without admission or parole

also

• (6) Illegal entrants and immigration violators

• (C) Misrepresentation

• (i) In general

  Any alien who, by fraud or willfully misrepresenting a material fact, seeks to procure (or has sought to procure or has procured) a visa, other documentation, or admission into the United States or other benefit provided under this chapter is inadmissible.

  (ii) Falsely claiming citizenship

  (I) In general

  Any alien who falsely represents, or has falsely represented, himself or herself to be a citizen of the United States for any purpose or benefit under this chapter (including section 1324a of this title) or any other Federal or State law is inadmissible.

How many people are prepared to, at a moment's notice, prove that they had entered the county via admission or parole? And can also prove, at that moment's notice, the legitimacy of the documents they have and had used? Remember also, one of the triggers for (6)(C) is falsely claiming US citizenship, so can you prove that at a moment's notice?

• (7) Documentation requirements

• (A) Immigrants

  (i) In general

  Except as otherwise specifically provided in this chapter, any immigrant at the time of application for admission-

  (I) who is not in possession of a valid unexpired immigrant visa, reentry permit, border crossing identification card, or other valid entry document required by this chapter, and a valid unexpired passport, or other suitable travel document, or document of identity and nationality if such document is required under the regulations issued by the Attorney General under section 1181(a) of this title, or

  (II) whose visa has been issued without compliance with the provisions of section 1153 of this title,

• (B) Nonimmigrants

  (i) In general

  Any nonimmigrant who-

  (I) is not in possession of a passport valid for a minimum of six months from the date of the expiration of the initial period of the alien's admission or contemplated initial period of stay authorizing the alien to return to the country from which the alien came or to proceed to and enter some other country during such period, or

  (II) is not in possession of a valid nonimmigrant visa or border crossing identification card at the time of application for admission,

You know who does not carry a passport or visa? United States citizens in the United States. What makes a person inadmissible under (6)(C)? Claiming to be a United States citizen.

How does one prove themselves to a DHS agent acting not in good faith, which is anyone taking possession of a person for merely being "charged with, arrested for, ... admits having committed, or admits committing acts which constitute the essential elements" a crime sans conviction. Conviction is the process of having proved the facts in court. Requiring conviction is how our system proves it knows what happened. How does one prove to that agent that they should not be detained?

This law was not passed yet before:

ICE Agents Detain American Citizens in Newark Raid

This has led me to revisit heartbreaking readings from 2018, such as “Are you alone now?” After raid, immigrant families are separated in the American heartland and from 2017 such as Exploitation and Abuse at the Chicken Plant. (paywall, readable with javascript disabled)

Allow me to include an extra large callout to Maryland's own Democratic representative April McClain Delaney for her participation in passing this. Thankfully, Alsobrooks and Van Hollen both voted against it in the Senate. My new representative, Elfreth voted against it.

Avoid Computer Crimes

 A reminder for all:

A person may not intentionally, willfully, and without authorization alter data stored by a computer database.

MD Criminal Law Code § 7-302 covers (among other things) intentionally inserting records, sign-ups, registrations, etc for the purpose of disrupting the proper use of the service. Intentionally signing someone up for a listserv to get that listserv blocked for sending spam clearly falls within this.

For the non-Maryland folks, 18 U.S. Code § 1030 is your guiding light.

Intentional disruption of someone else's use of Internet services is a crime.

Flooding a candidate's volunteer signup system with fraudulent entries to exhaust the system and prevent actual volunteer's from registering: computer crime.

Collecting the credentials of a campaign staffer and using it to download the emails from their account to distribute publicly in an effort to discredit and embarrass the campaign: computer crime.

We do not want or need to resort to computer crime to undermine functions of the electoral process, nonprofit organizations (even those with despicable goals), or generally civil society. (Judgement withheld regarding explicit government corruption. Reading recommendation: The Burglary: The Discovery of J. Edgar Hoover's Secret FBI, Book by Betty Medsger)

To defenders: Protect your systems and accounts as if people are fine with breaking laws. Loosing the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of your data is not mitigated by "Hey, that was illegal!"

Preserving Academic Integrity in the AI Writing Age

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) language models in writing has brought about numerous benefits, including improved efficiency and greater inclusivity for writers. However, the use of AI language models also poses significant challenges to academic integrity and the credibility of knowledge. The ease of abuse and the potential for false or misleading information to be generated and spread through AI-generated text can undermine public trust in the education system and the validity of the information being communicated. To address these challenges, it is important to prioritize originality, authenticity, and critical evaluation in the use of AI language models in writing.

On the one hand, allowing authors to use AI language models can increase their productivity and make writing more accessible. For example, AI language models can generate draft text in seconds, freeing up time for authors to focus on more important tasks. Additionally, AI language models can help writers who struggle with language barriers or disabilities to communicate their ideas effectively.

On the other hand, the use of AI language models can also lead to a lowering of academic standards and a decrease in the quality of written material. As AI language models become more advanced, it is easier for people to rely on them to create written material without putting in much effort themselves. This leads to a decrease in originality and authenticity, which are key components of academic integrity. Furthermore, AI language models can also generate false or misleading information, further eroding the credibility of knowledge.

To combat these challenges, it is important to emphasize the importance of originality, authenticity, and critical evaluation in the use of AI language models. This could include incorporating guidelines for using AI language models into academic writing policies and encouraging students and authors to think critically about the sources of information they use. By taking these steps, we can ensure that the use of AI language models in writing supports academic integrity, rather than undermines it.

In conclusion, while AI language models bring about many benefits for writers, they also pose significant challenges to academic integrity. By prioritizing originality, authenticity, and critical evaluation, we can ensure that the use of AI language models supports, rather than undermines, academic standards and the credibility of knowledge.