U.S. Citizens Say They Were Detained By Border Patrol Agent For ‘Speaking Spanish’

[Fang]

I'm pretty sure if I didn't speak Spanish, the Mexican authorities, just based on my skin color, would check my citizen status if I were wandering around Mexico. . . .

I'm not really sure why folks are acting all insane over this. . .

Because, in #MAGA land, you give up your rights to move about freely with both hands.

I'm Hispanic (50%) and I have no issues here. None what so ever. Now I do get delayed at our borders more than most. The last time the border agent actually apologized and just said due to my name they have to do some checks. I had no issue with it because I understand the importance of border security, and I understand why my name and appearance would drawl attention. But you're free to leave the country anytime you want.

50% Hispanic? And what's the other 50% trumpanzee? And you defend being profiled? Lol

Kind of like I'm being profiled by your post? Stunning you Liberals don't even realize what you do. Being Hispanic, I see you guys do it all the time.

1-I'm not a liberal.
2- racists are more likely conservatives. (Fact)
3- most Latinos are anti Trump and the GOP although latinos are generally conservarive... but they cant stomach the anti minority rhetoric coming from the right like most other minorities.

"2- racists are more likely conservatives. (Fact)" LMAO You just lost any credibility you might have had. That's right out of the Liberal playbook. But you're not a Liberal. Uh OK.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Start with the 4th Amendment. Illegal search and seizure. The agent had no probable cause for detaining them for even 2 minutes.

Start with where having a conversation is not "detaining", and CERTAINLY isn't searching or seizing, and then explain to me what the fuck the 4th Amendment has to do with it, other than your vague notion that anything you don't like MUST be "Unconstitutional".

They did not have a conversation. Illegal search and seizure is exactly what Joe ARPAIO was found guilty of when he stopped people with no probable cause. You are the one who believes that anything you like is constitutional and anything you don't like is unconstitutional.

Actually he was found guilty of contempt of court.


.

Taxpayers have forked over nearly $56 million since 2007 to pay Maricopa County's costs in the ongoing racial-profiling lawsuit against former Sheriff Joe Arpaio, the latest county totals show.

Joe Arpaio racial-profiling lawsuit costs Maricopa County another $400K

Seems you understand less about legal issues than you do constitutional issues. Civil costs and judgments aren't convictions.


.

Tell me you're surprised by this.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Mods, please sticky this thread, for I would love to see the same assholes that are defending jackbooted thugs detaining citizens for no reason other than speaking spanish, suddenly care about freedom and liberty when someone's 2nd amendment rights are violated by a Terry stop...I bet these same hypocritical bigots also backed Cliven Bundy's "little alamo" standoff.

"I would love to pretend that defending REAL rights is hypocritical when you refuse to defend PRETEND rights I think I have with no proof."

Whatever, Sparky. Maybe YOU can cite the actual law the officer violated, and explain how. It's pretty certain none of your other hyperemotional pearl-clutching buddies can do it, or they would have by now.

"Jack-booted thugs." The dark night of Nazism, where the TRUE horror was being forced to have a conversation. Puhleeze. I've seen school plays with less overacting.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I have a better acknowledgement of them than you do. I guess you are one of those people who piously assert Constitutional rights when it affects you but look the other way when it doesn't.

A uniformed officer comes up to you and says he wants to see a ID and that is a conversation to you. You live in a alternate reality that is more akin to Russia where you can be stopped for anything. Where officers are not held accountable for illegal actions. You apparently work overtime making excuses.

Your reality is a fantasy world you live in. A officer stops you and asks for ID. That is not a conversation. That is a detention. The fact is that you are not interested in facts. You have decided you don't believe these Hispanic women should be here so no fact will change your mind.

You don't even know what the 4th Amendment is.

You are the one who is leaving twit.

It’s truly astonishing we have to have this conversation

You're right there. It's astonishing that Americans know so little about what their actual rights are, and spend so much sound and fury on defending rights they don't have.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Try the 4th Amendment for starters. Speaking a foreign language is not a crime. You cannot stop someone without probable cause.

"4th Amendment! 4th Amendment! I can't tell you how it applies, but I JUST KNOW that it protects me from whatever I think is 'mean'!"

"Probable cause! Probable cause! I don't know what it means, or if it applies here, but they say it on 'Law and Order' so it must count!"

Still waiting for you to cite any laws supporting your claims, and very, very aware that you're probably dodging like a chickenshit.

You clearly do not understand the Constitution. What laws were they violating. Speaking Spanish is not illegal. The 4th Amendment clearly applies here. You sound like the chickenshit here.

If speaking Spanish was illegal, he would have arrested them for it. His concern was simply that they weren't legal citizens.

You cannot just stop people on the street and ask for their papers. That is why Maricopa County was forced to pay big bucks for what Arpaio was doing.

Really, jackass? So the next time a cop pulls you over and he asks for your driver's license for whatever reasons, you're going to go tell him to go get stuffed. Go for it.

Like I keep saying: they're all jacked up about "their rights", but they have no idea what those rights are, or how to go about defending them in an effective way.

 

[Cecilie1200]

"4th Amendment! 4th Amendment! I can't tell you how it applies, but I JUST KNOW that it protects me from whatever I think is 'mean'!"

"Probable cause! Probable cause! I don't know what it means, or if it applies here, but they say it on 'Law and Order' so it must count!"

Still waiting for you to cite any laws supporting your claims, and very, very aware that you're probably dodging like a chickenshit.

You clearly do not understand the Constitution. What laws were they violating. Speaking Spanish is not illegal. The 4th Amendment clearly applies here. You sound like the chickenshit here.

You ARE the absolute PINHEAD here. Were they CHARGED WITH A FREEKING CRIME? No? Then what is your f----ing point that Spanish isn't illegal? Trying to reason with people like you is like asking a dog why he doesn't want to go outside----- I could stack books citing case law all day long why your arguments don't hold a drop of water, but I might as well be talking to a chimp. You look like a human and walk, eat and type like a human, but the mind simply isn't there. As Reagan so prophetically said, it isn't that the Left are stupid, it is just that so many things they know are wrong.

Yo dingle berry

the 4A , is supposed to ensure that fedgov does not transgress upon their right to privacy, their fucking right to be left alone.

.

Yo kumquat-for-brains, take your 4A argument that a border agent cannot stop you for an ID check because something about you didn't look kosher to him and stuff it where the sun doesn't shine.

You have no obligation to submit to a field sobriety test; see what happens when you refuse.

In the case of a field sobriety test, you've most likely already given them probable cause, which is why they stopped you in the first place.

So no, the test is completely voluntary, but you're likely to end up arrested for whatever you did that made them think you were drunk.

 

[danielpalos]

Yapping Spanish at the border is as smart as “fire” in a movie theater
Libbies are the queens of fake personal outrage

the left can claim the same thing of the alleged, moral outrages of the right.

it takes morals to have moral forms of indignation.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

I have a better acknowledgement of them than you do. I guess you are one of those people who piously assert Constitutional rights when it affects you but look the other way when it doesn't.

A uniformed officer comes up to you and says he wants to see a ID and that is a conversation to you. You live in a alternate reality that is more akin to Russia where you can be stopped for anything. Where officers are not held accountable for illegal actions. You apparently work overtime making excuses.

Your reality is a fantasy world you live in. A officer stops you and asks for ID. That is not a conversation. That is a detention. The fact is that you are not interested in facts. You have decided you don't believe these Hispanic women should be here so no fact will change your mind.

You don't even know what the 4th Amendment is.

You are the one who is leaving twit.

It’s truly astonishing we have to have this conversation

You're right there. It's astonishing that Americans know so little about what their actual rights are, and spend so much sound and fury on defending rights they don't have.

Is that how it was back in mother Russia?

 

[Cecilie1200]

I have a better acknowledgement of them than you do. I guess you are one of those people who piously assert Constitutional rights when it affects you but look the other way when it doesn't.

A uniformed officer comes up to you and says he wants to see a ID and that is a conversation to you. You live in a alternate reality that is more akin to Russia where you can be stopped for anything. Where officers are not held accountable for illegal actions. You apparently work overtime making excuses.

Your reality is a fantasy world you live in. A officer stops you and asks for ID. That is not a conversation. That is a detention. The fact is that you are not interested in facts. You have decided you don't believe these Hispanic women should be here so no fact will change your mind.

You don't even know what the 4th Amendment is.

You are the one who is leaving twit.

It’s truly astonishing we have to have this conversation

You're right there. It's astonishing that Americans know so little about what their actual rights are, and spend so much sound and fury on defending rights they don't have.

Is that how it was back in mother Russia?

I can see where you'd need to ask, being so ignorant of ACTUAL oppression that you think a conversation with a law enforcement officer is the "horror of fascism", or some such shit.

 

[Marion Morrison]

U.S. Citizens Say They Were Detained By Border Patrol Agent For ‘Speaking Spanish’

Two U.S. citizens said they were detained last week by a Border Patrol agent in Montana after he overheard them speaking Spanish to each other in a convenience store.

Ana Suda and Mimi Hernandez said they’d popped into the store in Havre, a small town near the border with Canada, early Wednesday morning when they were approached by a uniformed Border Patrol agent, KRTV reported.

The two women, who are Mexican American, had been chatting in Spanish while waiting in line to pay for eggs and milk when ― to their incredulity ― the agent asked them for their IDs.

Suda told MTN News that even after seeing their IDs, the agent did not let them leave the parking lot for about 35 minutes.

Oh the horror! 35 minutes of inconvenience!

That may not would fly in Hialeah, but that's a given.

 

[busybee01]

They did not have a conversation. Illegal search and seizure is exactly what Joe ARPAIO was found guilty of when he stopped people with no probable cause. You are the one who believes that anything you like is constitutional and anything you don't like is unconstitutional.

Actually he was found guilty of contempt of court.


.

Taxpayers have forked over nearly $56 million since 2007 to pay Maricopa County's costs in the ongoing racial-profiling lawsuit against former Sheriff Joe Arpaio, the latest county totals show.

Joe Arpaio racial-profiling lawsuit costs Maricopa County another $400K

Seems you understand less about legal issues than you do constitutional issues. Civil costs and judgments aren't convictions.


.

He was found guilty of violating the 4th Amendment rights of Hispanics. There is guilt and innocence in civil suits as well.

Thanks for proving my point.


.

Not really. That is a matter of semantics.

 

[busybee01]

Detention for 35 seconds was unwarranted.

No, 35 seconds isnt enough time to determine if they are legal residents. I think anything up to a fews hours is appropriate.

You cannot just stop people on the street and ask for their papers. They broke no laws.

Tell me:

What law did a guy break when his rare gun collection gets confiscated just because someone decides it is too big and they don't see what need he has for it?
What law does a person break when a community decides he must take down his nativity scene @ Christmas because it was too religious?
What law does a business break when a customer want them to provide a service they don't offer because it offends them, so the Fed sues them?
What law does a president break when a political party decides to pitch a tent up his ass for a few years because they didn't like that he beat their opponent?
What law did a panicked dental assistant break when she gets gunned down in her car for making an illegal U-turn in Washington DC?
What law did a border agent break when he merely stops a couple people speaking a foreign language at the border in an area where no one normally speaks foreign languages, just to check them out enough to make sure they aren't any person of interest?

Try the 4th Amendment for starters. Speaking a foreign language is not a crime. You cannot stop someone without probable cause.

My Only Real ObjectioN is this.

Here is one for you.

 

[busybee01]

You cannot just stop people on the street and ask for their papers. They broke no laws.

Tell me:

What law did a guy break when his rare gun collection gets confiscated just because someone decides it is too big and they don't see what need he has for it?
What law does a person break when a community decides he must take down his nativity scene @ Christmas because it was too religious?
What law does a business break when a customer want them to provide a service they don't offer because it offends them, so the Fed sues them?
What law does a president break when a political party decides to pitch a tent up his ass for a few years because they didn't like that he beat their opponent?
What law did a panicked dental assistant break when she gets gunned down in her car for making an illegal U-turn in Washington DC?
What law did a border agent break when he merely stops a couple people speaking a foreign language at the border in an area where no one normally speaks foreign languages, just to check them out enough to make sure they aren't any person of interest?

Try the 4th Amendment for starters. Speaking a foreign language is not a crime. You cannot stop someone without probable cause.

"4th Amendment! 4th Amendment! I can't tell you how it applies, but I JUST KNOW that it protects me from whatever I think is 'mean'!"

"Probable cause! Probable cause! I don't know what it means, or if it applies here, but they say it on 'Law and Order' so it must count!"

Still waiting for you to cite any laws supporting your claims, and very, very aware that you're probably dodging like a chickenshit.

You clearly do not understand the Constitution. What laws were they violating. Speaking Spanish is not illegal. The 4th Amendment clearly applies here. You sound like the chickenshit here.

You ARE the absolute PINHEAD here. Were they CHARGED WITH A FREEKING CRIME? No? Then what is your f----ing point that Spanish isn't illegal? Trying to reason with people like you is like asking a dog why he doesn't want to go outside----- I could stack books citing case law all day long why your arguments don't hold a drop of water, but I might as well be talking to a chimp. You look like a human and walk, eat and type like a human, but the miBSnd simply isn't there. As Reagan so prophetically said, it isn't that the Left are stupid, it is just that so many things they know are wrong.

You ARE the absolute PINHEAD. They were detained for over a half hour. It amounts to the same thing because they should not have been stopped. You are the piece of dogshit. If we were talking about the 2nd Amendment, you people would be saying it is absolute. You defame Ronald Reagan. Trump supporters have dogshit for brains. They are too stupid to understand.

 

[busybee01]

Try the 4th Amendment for starters. Speaking a foreign language is not a crime. You cannot stop someone without probable cause.

"4th Amendment! 4th Amendment! I can't tell you how it applies, but I JUST KNOW that it protects me from whatever I think is 'mean'!"

"Probable cause! Probable cause! I don't know what it means, or if it applies here, but they say it on 'Law and Order' so it must count!"

Still waiting for you to cite any laws supporting your claims, and very, very aware that you're probably dodging like a chickenshit.

You clearly do not understand the Constitution. What laws were they violating. Speaking Spanish is not illegal. The 4th Amendment clearly applies here. You sound like the chickenshit here.

If speaking Spanish was illegal, he would have arrested them for it. His concern was simply that they weren't legal citizens.

You cannot just stop people on the street and ask for their papers. That is why Maricopa County was forced to pay big bucks for what Arpaio was doing.

Really, jackass? So the next time a cop pulls you over and he asks for your driver's license for whatever reasons, you're going to go tell him to go get stuffed. Go for it.

You are proving my point. Other people are saying these women could have just walked away without showing their ID. I say you can't.

 

[bodecea]

U.S. Citizens Say They Were Detained By Border Patrol Agent For ‘Speaking Spanish’

Two U.S. citizens said they were detained last week by a Border Patrol agent in Montana after he overheard them speaking Spanish to each other in a convenience store.

Ana Suda and Mimi Hernandez said they’d popped into the store in Havre, a small town near the border with Canada, early Wednesday morning when they were approached by a uniformed Border Patrol agent, KRTV reported.

The two women, who are Mexican American, had been chatting in Spanish while waiting in line to pay for eggs and milk when ― to their incredulity ― the agent asked them for their IDs.

Suda told MTN News that even after seeing their IDs, the agent did not let them leave the parking lot for about 35 minutes.

Oh the horror! 35 minutes of inconvenience!

That may not would fly in Hialeah, but that's a given.

Bend over again.......but just don't take the guns......yet.....

 

[OKTexas]

Start with where having a conversation is not "detaining", and CERTAINLY isn't searching or seizing, and then explain to me what the fuck the 4th Amendment has to do with it, other than your vague notion that anything you don't like MUST be "Unconstitutional".

They did not have a conversation. Illegal search and seizure is exactly what Joe ARPAIO was found guilty of when he stopped people with no probable cause. You are the one who believes that anything you like is constitutional and anything you don't like is unconstitutional.

Actually he was found guilty of contempt of court.


.

Taxpayers have forked over nearly $56 million since 2007 to pay Maricopa County's costs in the ongoing racial-profiling lawsuit against former Sheriff Joe Arpaio, the latest county totals show.

Joe Arpaio racial-profiling lawsuit costs Maricopa County another $400K

Seems you understand less about legal issues than you do constitutional issues. Civil costs and judgments aren't convictions.


.

Tell me you're surprised by this.

Can't do that. LOL

.

 

[Cecilie1200]

They did not have a conversation. Illegal search and seizure is exactly what Joe ARPAIO was found guilty of when he stopped people with no probable cause. You are the one who believes that anything you like is constitutional and anything you don't like is unconstitutional.

Actually he was found guilty of contempt of court.


.

Taxpayers have forked over nearly $56 million since 2007 to pay Maricopa County's costs in the ongoing racial-profiling lawsuit against former Sheriff Joe Arpaio, the latest county totals show.

Joe Arpaio racial-profiling lawsuit costs Maricopa County another $400K

Seems you understand less about legal issues than you do constitutional issues. Civil costs and judgments aren't convictions.


.

Tell me you're surprised by this.

Can't do that. LOL

.

Didn't think so.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

I have a better acknowledgement of them than you do. I guess you are one of those people who piously assert Constitutional rights when it affects you but look the other way when it doesn't.

A uniformed officer comes up to you and says he wants to see a ID and that is a conversation to you. You live in a alternate reality that is more akin to Russia where you can be stopped for anything. Where officers are not held accountable for illegal actions. You apparently work overtime making excuses.

Your reality is a fantasy world you live in. A officer stops you and asks for ID. That is not a conversation. That is a detention. The fact is that you are not interested in facts. You have decided you don't believe these Hispanic women should be here so no fact will change your mind.

You don't even know what the 4th Amendment is.

You are the one who is leaving twit.

It’s truly astonishing we have to have this conversation

You're right there. It's astonishing that Americans know so little about what their actual rights are, and spend so much sound and fury on defending rights they don't have.

Is that how it was back in mother Russia?

I can see where you'd need to ask, being so ignorant of ACTUAL oppression that you think a conversation with a law enforcement officer is the "horror of fascism", or some such shit.

I can see the irony in how conservatives constantly scream about communists while worshiping the same KGB tactics used in the old Soviet regime.

 

[Dschrute3]

More proof our Immigration System is broken. Yeah, let's keep Citizens out, while allowing Thousands of Illegals in. We need to rebuild Hussein's dismantled Immigration System. Something's very wrong.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I have a better acknowledgement of them than you do. I guess you are one of those people who piously assert Constitutional rights when it affects you but look the other way when it doesn't.

A uniformed officer comes up to you and says he wants to see a ID and that is a conversation to you. You live in a alternate reality that is more akin to Russia where you can be stopped for anything. Where officers are not held accountable for illegal actions. You apparently work overtime making excuses.

Your reality is a fantasy world you live in. A officer stops you and asks for ID. That is not a conversation. That is a detention. The fact is that you are not interested in facts. You have decided you don't believe these Hispanic women should be here so no fact will change your mind.

You don't even know what the 4th Amendment is.

You are the one who is leaving twit.

It’s truly astonishing we have to have this conversation

You're right there. It's astonishing that Americans know so little about what their actual rights are, and spend so much sound and fury on defending rights they don't have.

Is that how it was back in mother Russia?

I can see where you'd need to ask, being so ignorant of ACTUAL oppression that you think a conversation with a law enforcement officer is the "horror of fascism", or some such shit.

I can see the irony in how conservatives constantly scream about communists while worshiping the same KGB tactics used in the old Soviet regime.

So now law enforcement officers initiating conversations and asking if they can see ID is a "KGB tactic"? Boy, do YOU not have the faintest clue why the Soviet Union went down in infamy. Be a little more of a whiny, unrealistic snowflake, why don't you? Maybe rail about how the Nazis were horrific because they sent Jews to bed without supper, or something.