this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2025
110 points (99.1% liked)

politics

25074 readers
2240 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Stephen Miller was unequivocal: Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers would seek to arrest 3,000 or more immigrants per day, a staggering target that he said was necessary to carry out President Donald Trump’s mass deportation agenda.

But when federal judges pressed for details about that figure last week, the administration denied any such quota existed. The contradiction came in a lawsuit that alleged the intense pressure to rack up arrests had led ICE to conduct illegal sweeps in Los Angeles.

“DHS has confirmed that neither ICE leadership nor its field offices have been directed to meet any numerical quota or target for arrests, detentions, removals, field encounters, or any other operational activities that ICE or its components undertake in the course of enforcing federal immigration law,” a Justice Department attorney reported to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Wednesday.

Archive article: https://archive.ph/Ab2N6

top 7 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] thesohoriots@lemmy.world 40 points 1 day ago

Cool, so we can walk back some of that ICE budget then?

[–] atticus88th@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

The first round of settlements for unlawful arrest and detention are coming in and they cant afford to foot the bill.

Not gonna lie, if I had a darker complexion and had u.s. citizenship it might be worth the payout to just walk across the street when an ICE raid was ongoing.

[–] rhvg@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

“Our goal is not 3000/day, it’s 1000000/yr”

[–] floo@retrolemmy.com 12 points 1 day ago

TACO Tuesday came early this week!

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

Don't care.

If this was the internet we'd be able to say what these people deserve but. Y'know.

[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

Maybe bcz that was an idiotic goal to begin with...I can only assume this is bcz they've decided, instead of arrest goals, now they can just terrorize citizens to their hearts desire...

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 6 points 1 day ago

State, municipal, and county police say that too and still have quotas. I'll believe it when they tightly reign it in and stop paying ICE $7 per arrest.