First, I digress. The snow and ice. We have someone coming here this morning at about 11 to give us a path out of the house. Right now, we have 6 or 7 inches of very attractive white something on our lawn and walkways. It looks like snow, but it doesn’t act or feel like snow. You can walk on top of it like you are in, yes, Greenland. Your foot does not dig into it at all. It seems as firm as a hardwood floor. My fear is that our shoveler, when he arrives, will shake his head, tell us he’s sorry, but we need a specialist. The temperature is now 13 degrees, and the first time that it is expected to rise above freezing is next Tuesday, February 2, when Weather Bug says it will reach 35. And, yes, this weekend, there is a 30% chance of more snow, depending on the direction the next storm decides to take.

For those of you wonder how much snow needs to be cleared, I don’t have a firm figure, but I think it is between 200 and 250 feet. A walkway from the front door to the street, a walkway that goes in front of the house to the driveway, the driveway itself, and the sidewalks on both the 32nd Street side of the house, and the Davenport St front. It is quite a task.

While being housebound (there could be worse places to be housebound, to be sure), we are being deluged with TV reporting on what is happening in Minneapolis. And it looks like there is enough pressure on the White House that there we will be some changes to ICE policy.

But whoa! Changes to ICE policy? How can you have changes to a policy, when no one knows what the current policy even is? Is the policy to remove illegals who are dangerous criminals? Is the policy to remove all illegals? Is the policy to stir up trouble so illegals will self deport? Is the policy to deport a certain number of illegals (millions, as has been quoted)? I don’t think anyone knows the answer. But these stated policies (all have been stated) conflict each other.

And then there is the question about the word “illegal”, which I repeatedly used in the preceding paragraph. Who is an illegal? Someone who swims the Rio Grande or sneaks in cowering in the trunk of a car? Someone who overstays their visa? Anyone who came into the country through the southern border during the Biden years, even if permitted to come in and processed? Anyone at all who came through the southern border, no matter when they came?

And what is a criminal? Someone who has been convicted of a crime in the United States? Someone who has been accused, but not convicted of a crime in the United States. Someone who has been convicted of a crime, but already served their sentence? Someone who committed a crime in another country?

And for purpose of all of this, what is a crime? Does it have to be a violent crime? Does it have to be a felony or its equivalent? Can it be a misdemeanor? If so, does the misdemeanor have to involve violence? Or can it be simply a driving violation – speeding or its equivalent? Or…..is the act of crossing the border illegally itself a sufficient crime (if in fact it is a crime)?

No, there are no answers to any of these questions, as far as I know. That is because there seems to be no true policy. At least, if there is, we the people, including potential victims, have not been told what that policy is.

The question of transparency goes beyond not knowing the instructions under which Border Patrol or ICE agents are working. It also goes to the identity and classification of the people that they pick up. Because there appear to be no published lists, we don’t know if there is a priority on dangerous criminals, or if anyone who fits any of these categories are fair and equal game.

Are these immigration enforcement officials acting like the Gestapo? Is that a fair comparison? To some extent it is, based on the procedures (not the policy, but the procedures) that seem to be followed. But one thing I note. I think the Gestapo, chasing Jews, Communists, etc., was more efficient than ICE and the Border Patrol. I haven’t read anything about the Gestapo arresting people outside of the specific categories deemed targets in Germany at the time.

There are other policy questions. Should ICE be allowed to arrest people in churches, in schools, at work? Are children off limits? What about mixed (citizen, non-citizen) families? What about individuals who have lived in this country for 30 years, 20 years, 10 years, without any problems, working, paying taxes, raising families? What about people who having pending asylum cases, or are otherwise in-process regarding their immigration status?

President Trump keeps talking about murderers, rapists, pedophiles, etc., but there are no statistics as to how many of those arrested fit into these categories. Shouldn’t there be such statistics, so that the public can feel that these goals are actually goals, rather than talking points? I assume that these statistics do not exist because no one is keeping these statistics.

And then there are other questions, like the way people are picked up off the street (or its equivalent), how there is no contact with their families, how they are not allowed to make phone calls, how their phones and other valuables are often taken from them, how they can be sent immediately to detention facilities many miles from their homes (many often meaning thousands). And, of course, the condition of the detention facilities themselves. And what about the apparent inability for any of these individuals to be able to mount a defense, to show that they are being wrongfully held? And what about the ability to send them anywhere in the world (you don’t want to back to Honduras, so okay, we will send you to East Timor or maybe Iraq).

In addition, there is a question of coordination with local law enforcement. In many places, there is a prohibition on local law enforcement agents working with ICE or Border Patrol. There are a number of reasons for this: immigration is a federal, not a state or local affair; the police already have too much to do, and can’t divert to immigration enforcement without hurting security in their communities; and of course policy differences. But it seems to me that coordination would be possible on the following basis: ICE targets someone. ICE goes to local authorities and asks for their assistance, giving local authorities information about who is being targeted and why and what assistance is needed. Local enforcement makes a decision as to whether they agree with this particular target. If they do, and have sufficient resources, they help. If not, they don’t, and perhaps if not, they have a process by which they can go to a higher authority to determine whether the individual is being legitimately targeted. A little bureaucratic to be sure, but that’s the price you pay for a democratic society.

One last thing: there is no excuse for ICE or Border Patrol to act in ways that do not provide set Constitutional protections. First amendment rights of free speech, assembly and so forth. Second amendment rights to carry arms. Fourth amendment rights to be free from unconstitutional searches and seizures. Fifth amendment rights of due process. And so forth.

There is talk now about how ICE needs to be restructured, re-imagined, retrained. All that is fine. But in order to do that, you need to have the right policies in place. It seems that, for the most part, ICE’s enforcement activities could be suspended until this important step is accomplished. Say it takes six months. Okay, if the ICE targets have been in this country for ten or thirty years, what’s another six months? The Senate Democrats should vote against further funding of ICE until all of this has been accomplished.

Now you know what I think.