NYT Discovers ICE Immunity, Forgets Its History with 'Freedom'
The New York Times, in its concern over Trump’s alleged shift towards 'absolute immunity' for ICE, fails to connect the dots. This isn't a radical new invention but a logical (if horrifying) extension of policies and legal interpretations that have been incrementally expanding executive and agency power for decades, under both Republican and Democratic administrations. While the Times frames this
as a new, alarming development, it’s a policy iteration, not an aberration from the trajectory of increasingly unchecked state power, particularly concerning immigration and national security. One might recall similar legal acrobatics used to justify indefinite detentions, drone strikes on U.S. citizens abroad without due process, or sweeping surveillance programs. The ground for 'absolute
immunity' wasn't just cleared by Trump; it was tilled, fertilized, and irrigated over successive administrations, each chipping away at accountability in the name of security or efficiency. The institutional appetite for power doesn't vanish with a change of administration; it merely finds new outlets. Perhaps the Times could delve into the historical precedents it has previously, and quite often,
excused or minimized.