Pages

Saturday, June 07, 2025

ICE: Los Angeles, New York City

Components Of A Sane Southern Border


The tweet referenced above appears to be discussing recent events involving U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations in Los Angeles and New York, which have sparked significant protests and unrest. Based on available search results and posts on X, here’s a breakdown of the context:
Events in Los Angeles and New York (June 2025)
  • Los Angeles ICE Raids: On June 6, 2025, federal agents from ICE, along with other agencies like the FBI and Department of Homeland Security (DHS), conducted a series of immigration enforcement operations across Los Angeles. These raids targeted businesses, including a clothing wholesaler in the Fashion District and a Home Depot in Paramount, resulting in the arrest of dozens of individuals suspected of immigration violations. The operations were described as "military-style," with agents in tactical gear using flash-bang grenades, tear gas, and less-than-lethal munitions to disperse crowds of protesters. The Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) declared an unlawful assembly, and tensions escalated as protesters clashed with federal agents, blocking vehicles and throwing objects like eggs and concrete. Local leaders, including Mayor Karen Bass and Governor Gavin Newsom, condemned the raids as "cruel" and disruptive, while the Trump administration defended the actions, with officials like Stephen Miller and Tom Homan emphasizing enforcement of immigration laws.
  • New York Context: While specific details about large-scale ICE operations in New York on June 6 or 7, 2025, are less prominent in the search results, there have been reports of ICE activities in the city earlier in the year. For example, a 20-year-old Venezuelan high school student was detained outside an immigration courthouse in Lower Manhattan in late May 2025, marking a shift in tactics as ICE began arresting migrants at courthouses. Tensions have also been noted around a controversial plan to allow ICE agents to operate out of Rikers Island, New York City’s largest prison, which has drawn pushback from local officials and advocates. Protests in New York have occurred, with efforts to block ICE vans and protect detainees, though no widespread riots were detailed for June 7, 2025.
  • National Guard Involvement: Reports and X posts indicate that the National Guard was deployed to Los Angeles to support ICE agents amid the protests, as stated by Tom Homan, the Trump administration’s border czar. This escalation has heightened tensions, with some describing the situation as a crisis.
Reference to "George Floyd Level Uprising"
  • The tweet’s mention of a “George Floyd level uprising” draws a comparison to the widespread protests and riots that followed the killing of George Floyd by police in Minneapolis on May 25, 2020. Those events sparked a national and global movement against racial injustice and police brutality, with demonstrations in hundreds of cities, some turning violent.
  • The user suggests that the current situation—protests against ICE raids in Los Angeles and perceived similar actions in New York—could escalate to a similar scale due to the emotionally charged nature of immigration enforcement. The topic of immigration, especially aggressive raids, is described as “hotter” because it involves deeply personal and divisive issues: family separations, perceptions of injustice, and the treatment of undocumented immigrants, many of whom are valued community members. The use of military-style tactics, arrests of non-criminals alongside targeted “criminal illegal aliens,” and overcrowded detention conditions have fueled outrage among advocates, local leaders, and protesters.
ICE Officers and Safety
  • The tweet expresses support for ICE officers, noting their job is “not easy or safe.” Search results and X posts highlight the physical risks faced by agents during these operations. In Los Angeles, protesters surrounded federal buildings and vehicles, threw objects like concrete and eggs, and clashed with agents, prompting the use of tear gas, pepper spray, and flash-bang grenades. The DHS reported over 1,000 “rioters” assaulting officers, slashing tires, and defacing property, underscoring the volatile environment. The deployment of the National Guard to defend ICE agents further illustrates the perceived danger.
Potential for Escalation
  • The tweet’s prediction of an “explosion” reflects sentiment on X and in news reports that the situation could worsen. Posts describe “large to very large protests” and “riots” in Los Angeles, with streets blocked and traffic disrupted. The combination of military-style raids, local opposition from Democratic leaders, and community fear of deportations has created a tense atmosphere. However, no definitive evidence from June 7, 2025, confirms a nationwide uprising on the scale of the George Floyd protests, and the situation remains fluid with ongoing criticism and calls for accountability from advocacy groups.
Caveats
  • Information from X posts and web sources is not conclusive evidence of events. Reports of “riots” and the scale of protests vary, and some claims may be exaggerated or unverified. The situation is still developing, and official arrest numbers, the extent of violence, and the full scope of operations in New York are not fully clear as of June 7, 2025.
  • The comparison to George Floyd protests is speculative and reflects the user’s opinion rather than a confirmed outcome. Immigration enforcement is a polarizing issue, but its trajectory toward a nationwide uprising remains uncertain.
In summary, the tweet likely refers to the intense protests and clashes following ICE raids in Los Angeles on June 6 and 7, 2025, with possible related tensions in New York, set against the backdrop of the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration enforcement. The user fears this could escalate dramatically while expressing sympathy for ICE officers facing a challenging and unsafe situation. For the latest updates, consider following reputable news sources or official statements from ICE, DHS, or local authorities.

Humiliated Trump targets California | Opinion What is our moral responsibility as citizens of the United States when the President of the United States moves to deploy thousands of American soldiers against us? .......... Trump signed a memo late yesterday ordering 2,000 members of the National Guard to be deployed in Los Angeles County after federal immigration agents in riot gear squared off with hundreds of protesters for a second consecutive day. ......... Why is he doing it, and why now? ...... Because Trump can’t stand to be humiliated — as he has been in the last two weeks. ......... By senate Republicans refusal to quickly enact his so-called One Big Beautiful Bill. By Xi Jinping’s refusal to back down on trade (and restrict shipments of China’s rare earths, which American industry depends on). By Putin’s refusal to end the war in Ukraine. By the federal courts pushing back against his immigration policy. And, now, by insults and smears from the richest person in the world, who has a larger social media following than does Trump. ......... So what does Trump do when he’s humiliated? He deflects public attention. Like any bully, he tries to find another way to display his power — especially over people whom he doesn’t consider “his” people. ......... He has despised California since the 2016 election when the state overwhelmingly voted against him.......... And what better Ground Zero for him to try out his police state than Los Angeles — a city teaming with immigrants, with Hollywood celebrities who demonize him, and wealthy moguls who despise him? .......... Trump wants to escalate tensions. He wants a replay of the violence that occurred in the wake of the George Floyd murder — riots, mayhem, and destruction that allow him to escalate his police state further — imposing curfews, closing down parts of Los Angeles, perhaps seeking to subdue the entire state. And beyond......... We cannot be silent in the face of Trump’s dictatorial move. ........

What is needed is peaceful civil disobedience. Americans locking arms to protect those who need protection. Americans sitting in the way of armored cars. Americans singing and chanting in the face of the Americans whom Trump is drafting into his handmade civil war.

........... Americans who do not attempt to strike back, but who do what many of us did during the Civil Rights and anti-Vietnam War movements — peacefully but unambiguously reject tyranny. ........ A humiliated Trump is the most dangerous Trump. But he will overreach. He already has. And this overreach will ultimately be his undoing. ........ As long as we keep our heads. ........ May we look back on this hellish time and feel proud of what we did....... Be strong. Be safe. Hug your loved ones.

at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Thomas Jefferson’s Forgotten Vision: A Constitution for Every Generation



Thomas Jefferson’s Forgotten Vision: A Constitution for Every Generation

Introduction

When Americans think of Thomas Jefferson, they often recall the eloquent author of the Declaration of Independence, the third president of the United States, and a champion of liberty and democratic ideals. But one of Jefferson’s more radical — and lesser-known — beliefs was this: each generation should write its own constitution. In his mind, no single group of people had the moral or democratic right to impose their laws on unborn generations. Jefferson’s provocative idea, though largely ignored by history, remains deeply relevant in today’s world of entrenched institutions and political stagnation.

The Heart of Jefferson’s Vision: "The Earth Belongs to the Living"

Jefferson articulated this philosophy most clearly in a 1789 letter to James Madison. In it, he wrote:

“The earth belongs in usufruct to the living.”

This agrarian metaphor conveyed a bold political idea: just as land should be used and cared for by its current stewards, so too should governance structures be responsive to the living, not dictated by the dead. Jefferson argued that constitutions — like property — should not be passed down without renewal and consent. He calculated that 19 years represented the average span of a generation, and he believed that every 19 years, a society should reexamine and, if necessary, rewrite its constitution.

Why Jefferson Believed in Rewriting the Constitution

Jefferson’s proposal stemmed from a deep commitment to democratic legitimacy and individual autonomy. His reasoning can be distilled into a few central beliefs:

  1. No Perpetual Authority
    Laws made by a prior generation are not automatically just. If a constitution governs people who had no say in its formation, its legitimacy becomes questionable. Jefferson feared a form of "posthumous tyranny," where the dead hand of the past throttled the freedom of the present.

  2. Human Reason and Progress Evolve
    Jefferson believed that as knowledge advanced, so too should laws and institutions. To freeze a society’s foundational rules was to deny the people’s capacity for progress.

  3. Preventing Corruption and Stagnation
    Fixed structures invite elite entrenchment. Jefferson believed that institutional inertia would inevitably lead to calcified power, misaligned priorities, and public apathy. Periodic renewal would refresh the civic spirit and cleanse government of accumulated decay.

James Madison Disagreed — and Won the Debate

While Jefferson was envisioning generational constitutional renewal, James Madison, his close friend and political ally, offered a more conservative and pragmatic view. Madison believed that continuity and stability were essential for effective governance. He argued that constantly rewriting a constitution would lead to chaos, factionalism, and endless political instability.

Madison’s views largely prevailed. The U.S. Constitution, ratified in 1788, has never been replaced, though it has been amended 27 times. Instead of periodic reinvention, Americans have opted for incremental reform — a compromise between permanence and adaptability.

What Would Jefferson’s Model Look Like Today?

Had Jefferson’s vision been implemented, the U.S. might look radically different:

  • Every generation would convene a constitutional convention.

  • Civic participation would become a norm, not an exception.

  • Laws might evolve faster to reflect technological change and shifting values.

  • Institutions like the Electoral College or the Second Amendment might have been radically reformed or removed.

But there would also be risks: political polarization could make consensus impossible, while constant change could breed instability and confusion. The very fabric of national identity might feel less permanent.

The Relevance of Jefferson’s Vision Today

In an era where many democracies — including the United States — are facing gridlock, declining trust, and ossified institutions, Jefferson’s idea no longer feels like a relic of 18th-century idealism. Instead, it reads like a warning.

  • Why are we governed by a document written in the age of powdered wigs and musket balls?

  • Should laws written before the internet, women’s suffrage, or civil rights still reign supreme?

  • Would a constitutional convention today reinvigorate democracy or tear it apart?

These are not rhetorical questions. Around the world, nations from Chile to Iceland have engaged in constitutional rewriting with widespread citizen participation. It’s messy, yes — but it’s also a reminder that constitutions should serve the people, not the other way around.

Conclusion: Jefferson’s Timely Challenge

Thomas Jefferson’s belief in periodic constitutional renewal is more than a curious historical footnote — it’s a challenge to all democracies: Are we courageous enough to confront our foundational assumptions? Do we trust ourselves to build anew? Or do we prefer the safety of inherited systems, even when they begin to fail us?

Whether or not we adopt his 19-year cycle, Jefferson’s radical idea reminds us that democracy is not a finished project — it is a living experiment. And perhaps the boldest way to honor the founding generation is not to preserve their exact work, but to emulate their courage to start over when justice and freedom demand it.


America Needs a New Constitution — With an Expiry Date

Introduction: A 50-Year Reset

Thomas Jefferson believed every generation — roughly 19 years — should have the opportunity to rewrite its constitution. While 19 years may feel too frequent for a nation as complex as the United States, Jefferson’s core insight still rings true: no society should be governed indefinitely by the rules of its ancestors.

Today’s America is a deeply polarized, gridlocked society. This division isn’t just cultural or partisan — it’s structural. It is the product of governing institutions that no longer reflect the reality of modern American life. The Constitution, for all its historical brilliance, has ossified. Its mechanisms were built for a pre-industrial, slaveholding republic of 4 million — not for a 21st-century superpower of 330 million people navigating global markets, climate crises, AI disruption, and civil rights complexities. The result? Paralysis, disillusionment, and endless institutional warfare.

It’s time to convene a constituent assembly and draft a new constitution — one with an expiration date of 50 years. A constitution that expires doesn’t weaken a nation — it renews it.

The Constitution Has Not Aged Well

  1. The Second Amendment is a Historical Artifact
    When the Constitution was written, Americans lived in forests, frontier settlements, and a landscape where personal protection from wild animals and British soldiers was part of daily life. Muskets were single-shot weapons. Today, the "right to bear arms" has become a constitutional cudgel, preventing common-sense gun reform in the face of mass shootings, urban violence, and military-grade weaponry in civilian hands. A document written before indoor plumbing should not define 21st-century public safety.

  2. The Electoral College Is a Democratic Failure
    Designed as a compromise to appease slave states and skeptics of direct democracy, the Electoral College no longer serves any justifiable purpose. It distorts the popular will, renders millions of votes irrelevant, and concentrates campaign power in a handful of swing states. Twice in the last 25 years, the Electoral College has overridden the national popular vote. In a modern democracy, that should be unacceptable.

  3. The Senate Is Undemocratic by Design
    The rule of two senators per state — regardless of population — has created an America where 40 million Californians have the same Senate power as 600,000 Wyomingites. This imbalance gives disproportionate influence to rural, less diverse, and often less economically dynamic regions. It entrenches minority rule, blocks progressive legislation, and makes meaningful reform nearly impossible.

  4. Supreme Court Lifetime Appointments Have Become Politicized
    The Court was designed as an impartial body, but it has become an ideological battleground, increasingly untethered from public consensus. Appointments are essentially permanent and made more consequential by political gamesmanship in the Senate. The result: a court that shapes national life for decades with no accountability to the people.

Polarization Is a Symptom — The Constitution Is the Disease

The extreme political polarization in the U.S. is not simply cultural or economic. It is structural.

  • Outdated mechanisms like winner-take-all elections, gerrymandering, and party primaries reward extremism.

  • The lack of multi-party representation and proportional systems ensures binary political warfare.

  • Gridlock and institutional veto points lead to frustration, disengagement, and radicalization.

We are trying to solve 2025’s problems with 1787’s tools — and it’s not working.

A New Constitution Every 50 Years

A 50-year constitution is a middle path between permanent entrenchment and chaotic instability. It acknowledges that society changes — technologically, morally, demographically — and it ensures each generation has a meaningful say in how it is governed.

A constitutional expiry date doesn’t mean everything vanishes overnight. It means:

  • A Constitutional Convention is triggered automatically.

  • Citizens elect delegates, not politicians, to represent their visions.

  • The nation engages in a deep civic dialogue about its values, systems, and structures.

  • The new constitution may reaffirm parts of the old — but does so deliberately, not by inheritance.

What Could a New Constitution Look Like?

  • Proportional representation to end two-party deadlock.

  • Term limits for Congress and Supreme Court justices.

  • A popular vote for president, eliminating the Electoral College.

  • Guaranteed voting rights, enshrined in clear, modern language.

  • Explicit protections for digital privacy, climate security, and economic fairness.

  • A Bill of Responsibilities alongside the Bill of Rights, emphasizing civic duty and democratic participation.

The Founders Weren’t Gods — They Were Revolutionaries

The irony is that the very men who drafted the U.S. Constitution were radical experimenters. They had just overthrown monarchy. They built the first large-scale modern republic. They didn’t expect their document to become scripture. Jefferson himself insisted that no constitution should govern a people without their ongoing consent.

Conclusion: Time to Begin Again

America is not failing because its people are bad — it is struggling because its system is broken. The solution is not to abandon the Constitution’s ideals of liberty, justice, and self-governance, but to rethink the vessel that carries them.

We don’t need a revolution in the streets. We need a revolution in structure — peaceful, deliberate, and future-facing. A constituent assembly to write a new constitution, with the humility to know that it too will age, and the wisdom to expire it after 50 years.

Let America be what it has always claimed to be: a great experiment — courageous enough to redesign itself when it must. The next generation deserves nothing less.


at No comments:
Labels: ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)