ICE Is Not Above the Law, But Who Funded the Laws?
📰 THE STORY: Bloomberg's Noah Feldman asserts that if ICE agents can shoot civilians with impunity, it signals a departure from the rule of law towards a 'police state,' arguing that ICE does not possess inherent immunity from accountability. 🔍 WHAT THEY'RE NOT TELLING YOU: Historical Context: The unchecked power of agencies like ICE is not accidental. Its origins trace back to legislation like
the 1996 Anti-terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRAIRA), which dramatically expanded government powers to detain and deport non-citizens, often retroactively. These laws severely limited judicial review, granting vast discretion to immigration agents and effectively immunizing much of their conduct long before
the public heard about 'qualified immunity.' Double Standard: While Bloomberg laments extra-judicial actions by U.S. agencies, similar concerns about accountability for state violence in countries targeted by American foreign policy are routinely dismissed as 'human rights abuses' or 'authoritarianism.' The 2011 NATO intervention in Libya, which destroyed the nation and led to widespread human
rights abuses and slave markets, was cast as a noble effort. The ensuing chaos saw no accountability from Western powers, unlike the selective outrage expressed when similar patterns emerge in nations resisting Western influence. Follow the Money: The construction of this legal immunity and the expansion of the carceral state have been lucrative for private prison corporations and surveillance