How does this square with FOIA obligations? I get ICE sidestepping transparency by avoiding creating the responsive footage in the first place, but once the body cam footage exists, what basis could they use to withhold it other than redacting footage for the typical reasons?
“In April 2026, the Trump administration's Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion declaring the 1978 Presidential Records Act unconstitutional.”
There is certainly an assault on government record keeping.
Also there is an assault on non-partisan governmental employees. This administration is politicizing government at all levels — bureaucrats are losing their legal cover in the fight for compliance.
Emily Bazelon of the Slate Political Gabfest talks about the federal government in legal cases is losing their _presumption of regularity_. Which is to say courts had previously dealt with justice department under the assumption they would follow laws and court orders. Not so much these days.
Funny side note. I had a BS moving violation ticket. I called to request camera footage from the police vehicle. I was told how to request it and received in the mail a polite refusal stating it was being used in an ongoing investigation. Ha! Mine. (I did have a court date, no video, but I did win my case).
I've personally completely avoided the USA because of ICE, not because of principle of border policies purely from unpredictable treatment of people in custody with no recorse. Even if mistreatment are edge cases I've got no faith in the system to correct the wrong within itself. I've seen too many stories of legal americans and travelers not even getting bare minimum due process, or just being locked away for days no contact. I present and am read as a woman, if I get sent to male holding facility I'm just chum in the water. Which that decision could be made completely at the whim of the officer and the areas commanding officer, regardless of local laws.
What I got from reading the article - but not the headline or the comments.
- ICE is moving to start using cameras (currently not using them) so this move overall increases the amount of footage that exists and can be released.
- Their stayed approach is analogous to other law enforcement approaches already in use.
So the headline should be "ICE to start using body cameras". I suspect this is in general good news for ICE - most police departments that once felt "forced" to use body cameras have found that the cameras have been good for their image. Incidents that could have previously been trumpeted as an unjustified police action now have the context of what the suspect was doing just prior that justify the action. I think ICE is betting on the same and the "look what our agents have to deal with" footage may get public airplay into their favor.
Jail, jail, jail. Nothing less will stop these Gestapo-esque thugs.
And if you’re waiting for the mid-terms, you’re already acquiescing to their plans.
Also, it says something — to me, at least — that I have to think seriously before posting this. All I’m calling for is timely criminal prosecution of what I think and believe are crimes. I.e. for a lawful process. Yet doing so puts me at risk of an overbearing, unaccountable response?
This is why in almost all things the solution is less, not more, power to the State. That includes the violent, the legislative, and the judicial arms. Your favorite person or political position may be represented now but will not always be.
20 comments
[ 0.25 ms ] story [ 31.6 ms ] threadJust saying, you could FOIA so much video in about 2 months...
There is certainly an assault on government record keeping.
Also there is an assault on non-partisan governmental employees. This administration is politicizing government at all levels — bureaucrats are losing their legal cover in the fight for compliance.
Emily Bazelon of the Slate Political Gabfest talks about the federal government in legal cases is losing their _presumption of regularity_. Which is to say courts had previously dealt with justice department under the assumption they would follow laws and court orders. Not so much these days.
Funny side note. I had a BS moving violation ticket. I called to request camera footage from the police vehicle. I was told how to request it and received in the mail a polite refusal stating it was being used in an ongoing investigation. Ha! Mine. (I did have a court date, no video, but I did win my case).
https://americanoversight.org/investigation/presidential-rec...
- ICE is moving to start using cameras (currently not using them) so this move overall increases the amount of footage that exists and can be released.
- Their stayed approach is analogous to other law enforcement approaches already in use.
So the headline should be "ICE to start using body cameras". I suspect this is in general good news for ICE - most police departments that once felt "forced" to use body cameras have found that the cameras have been good for their image. Incidents that could have previously been trumpeted as an unjustified police action now have the context of what the suspect was doing just prior that justify the action. I think ICE is betting on the same and the "look what our agents have to deal with" footage may get public airplay into their favor.
We'll see
And if you’re waiting for the mid-terms, you’re already acquiescing to their plans.
Also, it says something — to me, at least — that I have to think seriously before posting this. All I’m calling for is timely criminal prosecution of what I think and believe are crimes. I.e. for a lawful process. Yet doing so puts me at risk of an overbearing, unaccountable response?
This is some serious sh-t.