- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Upstate NY man receives ICE warning about social media posts
Posted on 7/7/26 at 1:43 pm to onmymedicalgrind
Posted on 7/7/26 at 1:43 pm to onmymedicalgrind
quote:It's a close call. It certainly comes across as "unhinged."
I find the discussion of whether his email rises to unprotected speech far more intriguing.
Does unhinged warrant a wellness check? I think folks could argue that either way. Likewise, if this or other messages are edging close to line, the federal authorities are actually doing him a service in calling it to his attention.
I'm inclined to agree with Decatur though, that if it did rise to the level of an actionable threat, they would've picked him up, and brought him in.
1
Posted on 7/7/26 at 1:43 pm to Eurocat
quote:
arguing that officials violated his First Amendment right to speak out against the government,
Depends on what he was saying and who he's saying it against.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 1:45 pm to theballguy
And where he is saying it.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 1:46 pm to Decatur
quote:Hey, while you're here, same question I asked to Bonds ... What is the actual harm driving the suit? What are your thoughts?
No shite
Posted on 7/7/26 at 1:46 pm to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
All of your nonsense in this thread just to agree with me
wrong. Nobody was charged with a crime. The administrations warning letter was completely appropriate and reasonable. Your equating that letter with someone being charged is funny. quote:
I don't have cooties. Its OK for you to just admit you agree with me from the jump and save us all some time
I don’t think the letter was inappropriate. Do you agree?
Posted on 7/7/26 at 1:48 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
But I would be interested in your opinion about the validity of the lawsuit assuming we have complete context on all sides already (I don't think that we do BTW). What is the actual harm driving the suit?
I don’t see the damages. I don’t see negligence. I don’t see the suit doing very well. Maybe he will get a cost of litigation settlement. But he won’t win on the merits.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 1:48 pm to NC_Tigah
I haven’t looked at the lawsuit.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 1:49 pm to Decatur
Use your intuition. What damages from receiving the letter?
Posted on 7/7/26 at 1:50 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
It's a close call. It certainly comes across as "unhinged."
Does unhinged warrant a wellness check? I think folks could argue that either way. Likewise, if this or other messages are edging close to line, the federal authorities are actually doing him a service in calling it to his attention.
I'm inclined to agree with Decatur though, that if it did rise to the level of an actionable threat, they would've picked him up, and brought him in.
I think it is hyperbolic and provocative political speech that should remain protected. And I think its clear the government agrees, or to your point, he definitely would have been arrested.
I don't view the govt giving him a "warning" as a benevolent act to keep him out of trouble. It wreaks of a way to intimidate without implicating a legal or constitutional issue.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 1:50 pm to Decatur
quote:
I haven’t looked at the lawsuit.
Thanks
Posted on 7/7/26 at 1:52 pm to onmymedicalgrind
quote:The same could be said of the original email
It wreaks of a way to intimidate without implicating a legal or constitutional issue.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 1:53 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
wrong. Nobody was charged with a crime. The administrations warning letter was completely appropriate and reasonable. Your equating that letter with someone being charged is funny.
Dude you have to read better. My whole argument from my first post in this thread was that his speech was protected and doesn't constitute a true threat.
....which you finally admitted you agree with
quote:
I don’t think the letter was inappropriate. Do you agree?
I'm not a fan of it. Agree to disagree.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 1:55 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
The same could be said of the original email
I think the citizenry deserves wide latitude when it comes to criticizing the government officials who work for us.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 2:05 pm to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
I think the citizenry deserves wide latitude when it comes to criticizing the government officials who work for us.
Far worse is said about government officials right here, on this board.
I sure would not wish to see anyone here visited by LEOs over trash talk.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 2:11 pm to Eurocat
Interesting. I wonder what the full email reads like. I’m betting the parts quoted are just the tip of the iceberg.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 2:11 pm to BBONDS25
I can see a letter having a chilling effect on protected speech. Could be a First Amendment violation.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 2:16 pm to UtahCajun
quote:Perhaps, assuming we actually know the full content of the message(s) sent. Then again, that's just an assumption. Of course, presumably those "far worse" statements made here are also not emailed to the target's personal account.
Far worse is said about government officials right here
Posted on 7/7/26 at 2:20 pm to Decatur
quote:
I can see a letter having a chilling effect on protected speech. Could be a First Amendment violation.
I think one could make the argument that a reasonable person of ordinary firmness would be deterred from exercising their 1A after being served this "warning letter."
However, I doubt he will have this ruled in his favor.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 2:22 pm to Mid Iowa Tiger
quote:Right. I'll bet it would surprise no one if we find this "gentleman" has a series of "Dear Facebook" posts or other online content that is borderline, to be kind. If so, escalating this as he has, would be really stupid.
just the tip of the iceberg.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 2:25 pm to Decatur
quote:
I can see a letter having a chilling effect on protected speech. Could be a First Amendment violation.
The speech already occurred. Are you claiming his damages are that he felt he couldn’t write another email?
Page 8 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News