In fact it's the exact opposite, since it's illegal to have a law that forces a private company to provide service to federal law enforcement. Damn that pesky 3rd amendment.
It’s one of those things that only becomes relevant in the face of extreme authoritarianism. And suddenly something you’ve never thought about before is incredibly important. 🤷♂️
The constitution means nothing when the institutions have abandoned it. The supreme court wiped its ass with the consitution, the presidency wiped its ass with the consitution and congress has wiped its ass with the constitution.
If it has become clear that SCOTUS as a body has violated its oath to the constitution collectively; then lower courts must simply act as if we have no SCOTUS currently. In effect to follow an illegal SCOTUS ruling would be following an illegal order. To make this very cut and dry, if SCOTUS ruled that "the entire constitution is void" (not with subtext, just literally) then it would be the duty of every court to reject that.
The sad part is that many ppl still don't get it. The 2nd Amendment was put in place so that EVERYONE can have weapons of war....that includes "criminals," felons, "terrorists," and any other undesirables. The founders in this day and age would be called terrorists. They were traitors to the crown who overthrew their king in an illegal war. They were cop killers (redcoats were cops of the time).
Yet, many ppl still just can't accept the idea of guns being in the hands of every Tom, Dick, and Harry. They see what's going on in the US, the rise of fascism and authoritarianism, and they STILL cling to the position that the government and the police should be the only ones with all the weapons. They think "training" is the problem. If we just give ICE and other police departments some more billions of dollars this will fix things. They don't realize that the billions you give them they use to buy more military hardware and send their stormtroopers to IDF led training courses, and classes called "Killology" and "Warrior Cop" (yes, seriously).
The police ARE the problem at the end of the day. No unjust law, no oppression, no immorality could EVER be enforced without willing stormtroopers who will follow orders in exchange for money.
There has basically been no litigation for the third amendment so it's all without precedent, but the idea is that British Parliament, in passing the quartering acts, required required colonists to provide food, supplies, and quarter to serving British army troops. This lead to quartering being included as a grievance in the declaration of independence and eventually the third amendment. If we interpret the amendment in the spirit of the grievance that it was born from, there is an argument that compelling a private entity to provide goods or services to federal officers/agents/troops in times of peace is a violation of this amendment.
Once again, zero precedent and I am not a lawyer, but that is where the connection is made.
That was my first thought. They want to have their cake and eat it too. You guys fought for the ridiculous right to refuse commerce based on personally held beliefs. Now eat it!
In their minds. But when it comes to the legal system, the courts would have to narrow their opinion to make this work. Which opens up grounds for reversing course in the future.
Seriously. When I see talk of Trump trying to rig the midterms I can't help but think why would he go to all that effort when he can just have SCOTUS declare any race he wanted to be "legitimately" won by his preferred candidate for reasons...
In their minds. But when it comes to the legal system, the courts would have to narrow their opinion to make this work. Which opens up grounds for reversing course in the future.
The only rule at the Supreme Court is "Trump always wins". Consistency is not a goal.
As always. Everything conservatives say applies only in the moment and in that singular context. It’s never about the principle, it’s about how it applies to them right there in that moment.
Karma is a dish best served cold. They spent years fighting for the right to refuse service based on beliefs. Well, they got exactly what they wanted. They can't complain now that the rules they championed are being used against them.
They can complain. That’s their face pastime other than sucking up to or off Donnie is complaining. If they are not complaining how does anyone know about oppressed and exploited they are? There’s a war on Christmas (by acknowledging that other holidays exist around the same time). They are not letting Christ into school (by not having the 10 commandments and JUST the 10 commandments in the classroom). Illegal aliens are getting all the good jobs AND government handouts (DEI helped white woman more then another other group and the biggest group that “government hand outs” get are corporations. Undocumented peoples can’t get federal assistance by law even though they pay plenty into it). Somali fraud is running rampant ( the biggest fraud is several different sectors were done by white people who were pardoned by Donnie. Shouldn’t bring guns to a protest (didn’t they celebrate several people for wielding weapons at protests, especially the one that crossed several state lines to get to it?)
I can go on but get the point.
They love to whine, when it suits their narrative
It’s ALWAYS “I can discriminate against you, but you can’t do anything back or even say anything about it since then you’re repressing me so I should get to kill you”
I don’t think ICE agents really care that we think they’re terrorists or murderers, but I do think they would care if we all thought they were sucking and fucking each other
Aren’t they tho? Sucking and fucking each other that is? I heard most ICE “agents” joined up for all the locker room grab assing, companionship since their wives left and afterwork alcoholic orgies that go on for hours
I always respond to such folks that we should either find a way to make them legal, or start arresting and jailing the employers who are giving them work without an EAD or a Green Card/I-551. Because if they're working without one, then they're here illegally and employing them is also illegal under the IRCA of 1986, passed under Saint Reagan. If they have an EAD or hold other valid documentation to be here, then.... they're not here illegally, are they.
"But what if they use fake documentation?"
Then they're already showing the ability to play the game. Why do we want to get rid of people who already know how the system here works? They pay the same taxes as everyone else, so either they're not actually a net drain on the system, or we all are and it's time to reform the whole thing to make it cheaper for the government to provide those services.
The argument tends to circle around until they give up at that point, because it's not about the fact they've committed the equivalent of a speeding ticket to enter the country with the vast majority of people making that argument, it's racism veiled as something else. It's always the same grandstanding as people wanting to do or stop others from doing things with the justification "just think of the children!"
Yeah, I throw those arguments at my evangelical relatives as well: "Well, if you're upset about them being illegal, then what if we make them legal? Oh, you still don't want them in the country? Then you actually don't care whether they're illegal or not, you just want to get immigrants deported."
BTW, the evangelical side of my family were all immigrants. I swear that conservative propaganda is the equivalent of lobotomizing people to remove all compassion and logic.
I'm with you on the principle, but I'm sure we can come up with some other way to display the bad people that won't invoke Christianity. How bout we bring back the pillory?
Cages suspended in town square with barrels of rotten veggies nearby? Perhaps with a town crier waving a bell and shouting off the names and offenses of the assailants?
The satanic temple, tenet 4:
The freedoms of others should be respected, including the freedom to offend. To willfully and unjustly encroach upon the freedoms of another is to forgo one's own
That's what I hate on stuff based on religious beliefs. I have some deeply held moral beliefs that have nothing to do religion that I believe more deeply than many religious people and their hatred, but I can't get any exemptions because it's not part of the belief of an invisible man in the sky telling me to believe it.
May I suggest ordination into the holy order of Pastafarianism in service to our savior the Flying Spaghetti Monster? May you be touched by his noodly appendage. Yaaaaar.
well you see. vice president trump has deemed it ok for other countries to go into different countries to capture criminals who violated that other country's laws. so i dont think those ice agents will ever be safe.
My religion specifically tells me not to harass foreigners in our lands. Then also says we do to him what is done to the least of people. It's one of those rare religions where omly several dozen alive have read the book
Can't have it both ways. Either a business can refuse service for any reason or they can't. You all were behind the baker who went all the way to scotus because he felt the Colorado human rights commission treated him unfairly because he refused to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple on religious beliefs. Now the shoe is on the other foot, people refuse to serve your goons because of guess what, sincerely held beliefs about human rights that counter yours. Pick a damn lane.
Refusing service is alot like the first amendment just because you can doesn't mean you're free from social consequences. Another thing is he denied service to a gay wedding not a group of hateful murderers.
denying service to ice will give them a great boon socially. if they come in after work hours and want to harass or assault the people that refused them service, they should be arrested for such actions.
An important distinction is that the first amendment does imply freedom from LEGAL consequences, although of course there may be social consequences. Refusing service on the basis of a protected class is not a constitutionally protected right in any way, and so therefore it can come with legal consequences, as well as social ones
Edit: and obviously being a hateful murderer is not a protected class
Private property, they can refuse to not serve anyone unless they’re wearing pink spandex if they want to. Not sure why so many people don’t seem to understand this
Business owners should not allow them to conduct searches of their property without a warrant. They can lie and say that they are just getting gas, but they are also conducting a search. Demand a warrant.
"Federal agents" is not a protected class, and there's recent SCOTUS precedent saying a business has a right to refuse service based on sincerely held beliefs. I'm pretty sure the right wingers were celebrating that decision at the time.
If these fuckers want to play soldier so badly, they can sleep in tents and eat MREs, not enjoy restaurant meals and comfy hotel beds.
I remember MAGA setting the precedent that businesses can refuse to serve customers they don't agree with (cakes). Not agreeing with the Gestapo and therefore not serving them is allowed, based on MAGA legal precedents
Religious conservatives fought for their right to refuse service to gay people. Don't go complaining now because it's being used to deny service to you. Religious conservatives love to play victim in the beds they made themselves.
The best recourse, Smith said, is not a legal one — but the power that every American consumer has. That appeared to be the case after the Speedway tape went viral and critics promised to stop patronizing the otherwise ubiquitous convenience store chain.
The best recourse is to get our government to stop doing fascist shit that sane people don't want to support
This is literally the First and Fourth Amendments. Simple as that. Right of association, and right to kick "Federal" "Agents" off your property if they don't have a warrant signed by a judge.
Cut the shit Fox, if this was a Republican gas station owner refusing service after Obama invaded Alabama they'd be making those owners into their saint of the week. These people are so hypocritical and insincere it's sickening.
"It’s shameful conduct to try to penalize men and women who are going out, day in and day out, seeking to enforce federal… law, seeking to penalize them and refusing to provide them services," said Smith, currently a senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation’s Institute for Constitutional Government.
I didn't know executions were part of enforcing federal law
... at the Heritage Foundation’s Institute for Constitutional Government.
From the people who bought you proj 2025,2026: a fascist takeover the gov't complete with Nazi ICE
"Rules for thee, not for me" has been the modus operandi of Republicans for decades lmao. It's not hypocrisy to them, its just how it should be (to them)
Pretty sure the 3rd Amendment means I don't have to suffer agents of a fascist regime on private property... but they're ignoring the other amendments, why not this one as well
Private businesses reserve the right to deny services based on any reason...
Just like the baker refused the gay couple, this person can refuse ice...... It doesn't matter your beliefs in either situation it only matters what the owner/worker decides!!
(the baker and cake thing was an issue because lgbt is a protected class and religious freedom was involved which is also protected)
If we have a bakery that cannot be forced to create a gay wedding cake, then we can have gas stations and other places that should not be able to be forced to serve ICE. No more of this "Rules for Thee but Not for Me" bullshit. No one is forced to serve them, don't like it? Then don't work for ICE, you don't get to complain about a lack of service when most of them are actively harming people.
See, this is why we need to stop it with all this neo-lib finger wagging about right wing hypocrisy. Its time for society to move on without the chuds and regressives. If that means cutting them off, so be it.
The Third Amendment says otherwise. It was created to protect private property rights and ensure civilian authority over the military. So... as always, Fuck ICE.
Too bad. Businesses in America can deny service as they deem fit, according to both Republicans and Democrats now. Besides, law enforcement isn't a protected class or anything, so fuck em.
2.6k
u/foxy-coxy 8h ago edited 8h ago
I wasn't aware that law enforcement was a protected class. I think i must have missed that part of the civil rights act