What happens when you follow the constitution at an internal DHS checkpoint?

[SFC Ollie]

Excellent legal oriented analysis on this incident provided here @

https://www.checkpointusa.org/blog/index.php/2010/10/10/p227

Nothing Biased there.......

It's really quite simple. The ICE has a job to do, Most Americans want the borders sealed (I hope) and clowns like this are telling us not to cooperate with them. Not to answer simple questions that do you no harm.

Plain simple stupidity.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Do you consider checkpoints for ANY reason to be a violation of the 4th Amendment?

Or do we assume that once we are on a public highway we are subject to scrutiny for the general welfare of everybody else who shares that highway?

Is your vehicle roadworthy? Properly tagged? Registered to you or legally in your possession?

Do you have a valid driver's license and minimal required insurance?

Are you a citizen or in this country legally?

If nobody is ever allowed to check these things, there wouldn't be much incentive to follow the law huh? A whole lot of people would just take their chances that they wouldn't commit a violation or have an accident and could just save all the lovely money necessary to be legal.

Unless you have broken a law that have no legal authority to stop you, period.

 

[SFC Ollie]

If I read this right it was an internal boarder patrol checkpoint. They have some that are fixed and some that they move around. I remember getting stopped at one half way between Corpus Christi and Laredo.

No biggy are you American? Yes, from me my wife and her mother. (Remember the Mrs is American of Mexican decent)

Where do you live?

Corpus Christie.

And where are you coming from?

My father in laws grave in Laredo.

Thank you sir have a pleasant day.


Simple and we were on our way in less than a minute.

Why were they there? I hope to look for illegals.

Did it infringe upon my rights? I don't think so.

What if you had been a "legal American," but had happened to have had a little grass in a baggie sitting there on the back seat? But for this 4th Amendment violating checkpoint, you would have been going on your merry way.

Would you still feel so tolerant toward the check point then?

Why is there always this "what if" you were actually breaking the law? I would not have an illegal substance sitting on the back seat of my car.

 

[SFC Ollie]

You have the right to remain silent. So very true. And the police have the duty to arrest you if they perceive that you have broken the law or pose a threat to another person or yourself.

And what right does the police have to stop and ask for your papers? Remember that stylish, German regime in the 1930s-40s who asked its citizens "Deine papiers, bitte!"? Sound familiar?

Now anyone who refuses to co-operate with the legal authorities probably is a douche bag.

Even if what is asked of the person is absolutely intrusive and unnecessary?

What did this joker accomplish?

He shows us that some folks don't rollover and bark on command like the majority of Americans do.

DUh, another anarchist?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Do you consider checkpoints for ANY reason to be a violation of the 4th Amendment?

Or do we assume that once we are on a public highway we are subject to scrutiny for the general welfare of everybody else who shares that highway?

Is your vehicle roadworthy? Properly tagged? Registered to you or legally in your possession?

Do you have a valid driver's license and minimal required insurance?

Are you a citizen or in this country legally?

If nobody is ever allowed to check these things, there wouldn't be much incentive to follow the law huh? A whole lot of people would just take their chances that they wouldn't commit a violation or have an accident and could just save all the lovely money necessary to be legal.

Checkpoints do not examine a vehicle for road worthiness. I understand that all states do not require this type of check, but the ones that do require you to get inspected at certified stations on a regular basis. Police can stop you if the inspection is not current. They can also check to be sure your license and insurance is valid.

Setting up checkpoints is a search, whether you think it is or not. That means that they have to have some sort of legal justification for that search, and the general welfare is not sufficient as far as I know.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

First off I seriously doubt that anyone has ever had their weapons illegally confiscated at one of these checkpoints. Unless of course they were being an asshole.

Now please provide a link to this law that you know so well. I find it hard to believe that ICE asking if you are a citizen is illegal. After all that is their job. It's what we pay them for. You want to stack the deck against them so that they cannot ask someone a perfectly logical question.

It's my job to stop illegals but I can't ask them if they are illegal????? WTF? Keep your job, and welcome to anarchy.

It doesn't matter if you are an asshole or not. US law allows CBP to search anyone within 25 miles of the border. No warrant, no probable cause. All they need is a hair up their ass and your proximity to a US border. During that search they can take anything they want, including your computer or guns, and hold it for a reasonable amount of time for investigation.

Why do I need to provide a link to the law that you do not have to declare citizenship when asked? The fact that the two people in this story did not get arrested, or cited, for not answering the question proves that you do not have to answer the question.

I did not say that ICE cannot ask the question, I said that you, as a US citizen, are not required to answer. Resident aliens and visitors with a visa are required to produce proof of their immigration status, and, if they do not, can be detained until that status is determined. They can also face a fine, jail time, and possible deportation.

I grew up in El Paso, and I heard all sorts of fairy tails about what La Migra can, and cannot, do. I checked it out for myself.

Why? Because you keep quoting this law but you don't back it up.

And yes you did say they could not ask the question.

But whatever floats your boat, we can see you could care less about sealing the borders and cooperating with authority. Again, welcome to anarchy.

I did not say they cannot ask. The part of my response that you bolded was in response to your assertion that I am legally required to answer that question. I can see how you could interpet that wrong, but that was not my intent.

And, again, if what that guy did was illegal he, and his girlfriend, would have been charged. Since they were not that leaves the burden of proof on you. ICE has to follow the law just like local police do, and they have to have probable cause before they can treat a person like a suspect, just like local police. I cannot point to a specific law because it is not a specific law, it is simply the law based on numerous court rulings.

They have to assume anyone they encounter is a US citizen unless that have a reason to suspect otherwise. If it did not work that way they could arrest everyone unless they could provide proof of citizenship.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Do you consider checkpoints for ANY reason to be a violation of the 4th Amendment?

Or do we assume that once we are on a public highway we are subject to scrutiny for the general welfare of everybody else who shares that highway?

Is your vehicle roadworthy? Properly tagged? Registered to you or legally in your possession?

Do you have a valid driver's license and minimal required insurance?

Are you a citizen or in this country legally?

If nobody is ever allowed to check these things, there wouldn't be much incentive to follow the law huh? A whole lot of people would just take their chances that they wouldn't commit a violation or have an accident and could just save all the lovely money necessary to be legal.

Checkpoints do not examine a vehicle for road worthiness. I understand that all states do not require this type of check, but the ones that do require you to get inspected at certified stations on a regular basis. Police can stop you if the inspection is not current. They can also check to be sure your license and insurance is valid.

Setting up checkpoints is a search, whether you think it is or not. That means that they have to have some sort of legal justification for that search, and the general welfare is not sufficient as far as I know.

So those safety checks and sobriety check points are illegal? I'll tell that to the officer next time they stop me and ask for my license, registration, and proof of insurance... NOT.

 

[Foxfyre]

Do you consider checkpoints for ANY reason to be a violation of the 4th Amendment?

Or do we assume that once we are on a public highway we are subject to scrutiny for the general welfare of everybody else who shares that highway?

Is your vehicle roadworthy? Properly tagged? Registered to you or legally in your possession?

Do you have a valid driver's license and minimal required insurance?

Are you a citizen or in this country legally?

If nobody is ever allowed to check these things, there wouldn't be much incentive to follow the law huh? A whole lot of people would just take their chances that they wouldn't commit a violation or have an accident and could just save all the lovely money necessary to be legal.

Checkpoints do not examine a vehicle for road worthiness. I understand that all states do not require this type of check, but the ones that do require you to get inspected at certified stations on a regular basis. Police can stop you if the inspection is not current. They can also check to be sure your license and insurance is valid.

Setting up checkpoints is a search, whether you think it is or not. That means that they have to have some sort of legal justification for that search, and the general welfare is not sufficient as far as I know.

But if my tires are bald, if I'm leaking gasoline, if I have an unsafe hitch for the trailer I'm towing, etc. etc. etc. these can be noted and dealt with. But you're right the purpose of checkpoints is not to catch these things, but weigh stations for heavier vehicles do catch these things.

But conductors on trains check your ticket--they aren't required to take your word that you have one. When I go through customs I have to produce a passport. They don't take my word that I have one.

There is a world of difference between a law enforcement officer asking you to verify that you have a valid driver's license, insurance, and registration for your vehicle and conducting a search when there is no suspicion that you have broken the law. There is a world of difference between questioning a driver re his sobriety or lack thereof and searching a vehicle. A driver who refused to cooperate with law enforcement at such times in my opinion has demonstrated justification for further scrutiny including a vehicle search.

If there is no means to verify compliance with the law, there simply is no reason to have the law.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Do you consider checkpoints for ANY reason to be a violation of the 4th Amendment?

Or do we assume that once we are on a public highway we are subject to scrutiny for the general welfare of everybody else who shares that highway?

Is your vehicle roadworthy? Properly tagged? Registered to you or legally in your possession?

Do you have a valid driver's license and minimal required insurance?

Are you a citizen or in this country legally?

If nobody is ever allowed to check these things, there wouldn't be much incentive to follow the law huh? A whole lot of people would just take their chances that they wouldn't commit a violation or have an accident and could just save all the lovely money necessary to be legal.

Checkpoints do not examine a vehicle for road worthiness. I understand that all states do not require this type of check, but the ones that do require you to get inspected at certified stations on a regular basis. Police can stop you if the inspection is not current. They can also check to be sure your license and insurance is valid.

Setting up checkpoints is a search, whether you think it is or not. That means that they have to have some sort of legal justification for that search, and the general welfare is not sufficient as far as I know.

So those safety checks and sobriety check points are illegal? I'll tell that to the officer next time they stop me and ask for my license, registration, and proof of insurance... NOT.

Unfortunately no, but that does not make them right. I will also point out that, in California, if you know about a checkpoint and exit the road before you reach it the police cannot stop you simply because you avoid the checkpoint. That is what actually makes those things legal, the fact that you have the option of avoiding them if you choose.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Do you consider checkpoints for ANY reason to be a violation of the 4th Amendment?

Or do we assume that once we are on a public highway we are subject to scrutiny for the general welfare of everybody else who shares that highway?

Is your vehicle roadworthy? Properly tagged? Registered to you or legally in your possession?

Do you have a valid driver's license and minimal required insurance?

Are you a citizen or in this country legally?

If nobody is ever allowed to check these things, there wouldn't be much incentive to follow the law huh? A whole lot of people would just take their chances that they wouldn't commit a violation or have an accident and could just save all the lovely money necessary to be legal.

Checkpoints do not examine a vehicle for road worthiness. I understand that all states do not require this type of check, but the ones that do require you to get inspected at certified stations on a regular basis. Police can stop you if the inspection is not current. They can also check to be sure your license and insurance is valid.

Setting up checkpoints is a search, whether you think it is or not. That means that they have to have some sort of legal justification for that search, and the general welfare is not sufficient as far as I know.

But if my tires are bald, if I'm leaking gasoline, if I have an unsafe hitch for the trailer I'm towing, etc. etc. etc. these can be noted and dealt with. But you're right the purpose of checkpoints is not to catch these things, but weigh stations for heavier vehicles do catch these things.

But conductors on trains check your ticket--they aren't required to take your word that you have one. When I go through customs I have to produce a passport. They don't take my word that I have one.

There is a world of difference between a law enforcement officer asking you to verify that you have a valid driver's license, insurance, and registration for your vehicle and conducting a search when there is no suspicion that you have broken the law. There is a world of difference between questioning a driver re his sobriety or lack thereof and searching a vehicle. A driver who refused to cooperate with law enforcement at such times in my opinion has demonstrated justification for further scrutiny including a vehicle search.

If there is no means to verify compliance with the law, there simply is no reason to have the law.

Trains are not government highways, and conductors are not police.

 

[strollingbones]

sillie me...being an anarchist who likes all my rights...sillie me

 

[Foxfyre]

Checkpoints do not examine a vehicle for road worthiness. I understand that all states do not require this type of check, but the ones that do require you to get inspected at certified stations on a regular basis. Police can stop you if the inspection is not current. They can also check to be sure your license and insurance is valid.

Setting up checkpoints is a search, whether you think it is or not. That means that they have to have some sort of legal justification for that search, and the general welfare is not sufficient as far as I know.

But if my tires are bald, if I'm leaking gasoline, if I have an unsafe hitch for the trailer I'm towing, etc. etc. etc. these can be noted and dealt with. But you're right the purpose of checkpoints is not to catch these things, but weigh stations for heavier vehicles do catch these things.

But conductors on trains check your ticket--they aren't required to take your word that you have one. When I go through customs I have to produce a passport. They don't take my word that I have one.

There is a world of difference between a law enforcement officer asking you to verify that you have a valid driver's license, insurance, and registration for your vehicle and conducting a search when there is no suspicion that you have broken the law. There is a world of difference between questioning a driver re his sobriety or lack thereof and searching a vehicle. A driver who refused to cooperate with law enforcement at such times in my opinion has demonstrated justification for further scrutiny including a vehicle search.

If there is no means to verify compliance with the law, there simply is no reason to have the law.

Trains are not government highways, and conductors are not police.

The train from Albuquerque to Santa Fe is controlled and operated by the same government that controls the highway between Albuquerque and Santa Fe. The principle of having to produce a ticket to use the train is not much different than having to produce a driver's license, insurance certificate, and registration to use the highway. You put a lot more people a risk using the highway than you do taking the train and only the driver will be asked for verification that he is complying with the law.

Again, if there is no means for law enforcement verify that citizens are complying with the law, what use is there in having the law? Why not just make it voluntary and hope folks will do it? Would you feel a lot safer out there on the highway during your morning commute?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

What happens when you assert your rights protected by the constitution at an internal DHS checkpoint?

This happens...

What Happens When You Insist on Your 5th Amendment Rights to Not Answer Questions or Show Your Papers to Immigration Cops in an Empty Desert Somewhere? - Hit & Run : Reason Magazine

A DHS checkpoint? You can travel freely in this country. You do NOT have a constitutional right to board an airplane

stupid

 

[Quantum Windbag]

But if my tires are bald, if I'm leaking gasoline, if I have an unsafe hitch for the trailer I'm towing, etc. etc. etc. these can be noted and dealt with. But you're right the purpose of checkpoints is not to catch these things, but weigh stations for heavier vehicles do catch these things.

But conductors on trains check your ticket--they aren't required to take your word that you have one. When I go through customs I have to produce a passport. They don't take my word that I have one.

There is a world of difference between a law enforcement officer asking you to verify that you have a valid driver's license, insurance, and registration for your vehicle and conducting a search when there is no suspicion that you have broken the law. There is a world of difference between questioning a driver re his sobriety or lack thereof and searching a vehicle. A driver who refused to cooperate with law enforcement at such times in my opinion has demonstrated justification for further scrutiny including a vehicle search.

If there is no means to verify compliance with the law, there simply is no reason to have the law.

Trains are not government highways, and conductors are not police.

The train from Albuquerque to Santa Fe is controlled and operated by the same government that controls the highway between Albuquerque and Santa Fe. The principle of having to produce a ticket to use the train is not much different than having to produce a driver's license, insurance certificate, and registration to use the highway. You put a lot more people a risk using the highway than you do taking the train and only the driver will be asked for verification that he is complying with the law.

Again, if there is no means for law enforcement verify that citizens are complying with the law, what use is there in having the law? Why not just make it voluntary and hope folks will do it? Would you feel a lot safer out there on the highway during your morning commute?

The principle is a lot different, just like paying a toll on a toll road is different than paying taxes that help build an interstate highway. The police are quite free to stop anyone and everyone who is driving down the road recklessly, or anyone who is otherwise not obeying the traffic laws. They are then free to check to make sure the driver is in compliance with all the other applicable laws, and ask for a license, registration, and proof of insurance. Why would having a checkpoint on a highway that causes congestion, slows traffic, and angers everyone, make me feel safer than the police actually doing their job and getting reckless drivers off the road?

 

[Foxfyre]

Trains are not government highways, and conductors are not police.

The train from Albuquerque to Santa Fe is controlled and operated by the same government that controls the highway between Albuquerque and Santa Fe. The principle of having to produce a ticket to use the train is not much different than having to produce a driver's license, insurance certificate, and registration to use the highway. You put a lot more people a risk using the highway than you do taking the train and only the driver will be asked for verification that he is complying with the law.

Again, if there is no means for law enforcement verify that citizens are complying with the law, what use is there in having the law? Why not just make it voluntary and hope folks will do it? Would you feel a lot safer out there on the highway during your morning commute?

The principle is a lot different, just like paying a toll on a toll road is different than paying taxes that help build an interstate highway. The police are quite free to stop anyone and everyone who is driving down the road recklessly, or anyone who is otherwise not obeying the traffic laws. They are then free to check to make sure the driver is in compliance with all the other applicable laws, and ask for a license, registration, and proof of insurance. Why would having a checkpoint on a highway that causes congestion, slows traffic, and angers everyone, make me feel safer than the police actually doing their job and getting reckless drivers off the road?

I do see your point. I sympathise with your point. But I still don't have a problem with random checkpoints that are a huge reason as many people comply with the law as do.

I'll think on it some more. But if there is no way to check on compliance with the law unless you break the law or have an accident, I just think a whole lot of folks would roll the dice and not comply.

 

[JBeukema]

"I'm not going to be answering any questions under the protection granted via the 5th amendment of the constitution of the United States.


In court, that's known to the jury as a confession...

The guy's an idiot and a prick who gave them plenty of reason to be suspicious.

at this point I realized that if I had wanted to take this even further I likely could have argued that he had to legal reason to run my license since I had not done anything wrong...

Wrong. You've been stopped and detained. Refuse to provide ID? Then you can be taken into police custody until you are identified and it is confirmed that you have no warrants etc. Not to mention that you're operating a motor vehicle....

 

[JBeukema]

If I read this right it was an internal boarder patrol checkpoint. They have some that are fixed and some that they move around. I remember getting stopped at one half way between Corpus Christi and Laredo.

No biggy are you American? Yes, from me my wife and her mother. (Remember the Mrs is American of Mexican decent)

Where do you live?

Corpus Christie.

And where are you coming from?

My father in laws grave in Laredo.

Thank you sir have a pleasant day.


Simple and we were on our way in less than a minute.

Why were they there? I hope to look for illegals.

Did it infringe upon my rights? I don't think so.

They didn't infringe upon your rights because you chose to voulentarily give them information.

That's fine if you're okay with the exponential expansion of DHS internal checkpoints.

Now if you had gotten a bad vibe from the agents and had decided to not answer their questions for any reason that is fine as well according to the constitution anyway...

Then my actions might make them suspicious. If they have reason to believe I am hiding something (my status? Something in the vehicle?), they can detain me.

Pick you battles, dude.

 

[JBeukema]

I did not say that ICE cannot ask the question

asking a person about citizenship is not legal.

So are you a liar, a retard, or both?

 

[JBeukema]

If I read this right it was an internal boarder patrol checkpoint. They have some that are fixed and some that they move around. I remember getting stopped at one half way between Corpus Christi and Laredo.

No biggy are you American? Yes, from me my wife and her mother. (Remember the Mrs is American of Mexican decent)

Where do you live?

Corpus Christie.

And where are you coming from?

My father in laws grave in Laredo.

Thank you sir have a pleasant day.


Simple and we were on our way in less than a minute.

Why were they there? I hope to look for illegals.

Did it infringe upon my rights? I don't think so.

What if you had been a "legal American," but had happened to have had a little grass in a baggie sitting there on the back seat? But for this 4th Amendment violating checkpoint, you would have been going on your merry way.

Would you still feel so tolerant toward the check point then?

If his actions raised suspicion and he was detained and searched in accordance with the law and drugs were found- that's his problem.

Oops, got caught.

 

[JBeukema]

Unless you have broken a law that have no legal authority to stop you, period.

Fail.

The standard has to do with reasonable suspicion- not having already been convicted of the crime you're now being stopped for.

Dumbass.