[flagged]

> Protesting is absolutely something you can and should be able to do casually

Then you are going to be identified and your conversations monitored. This is precisely the outcome the article is complaining about. I find that expectation absurd.

> of a self-governing people

This describes the majority not the individual.

> and petition the government

There is no expectation or statement that your anonymity will be protected. The entire idea of a "petition" immediately defies this.

> to prevent the enforcement of law.

How does "tracking ICE" _prevent_ the enforcement of the law? Your views on the first amendment suddenly became quite narrow.

> a fundamental human right

No. It's not. Governments are not natural. So you have no "fundamental" rights here.

> and obligation

No. It's not.

> It is something that you should do as casually as you would voting

I would say voting is _not_ something you should do casually.

> something you do from time to time when the moment demands it.

Then you should expect some consequences in your life. If you actually want to avoid those then put your casual demeanor down and get serious. Otherwise there's a decent chance you will make things worse and do nothing to solve your original problem.

> See also: https://enwp.org/Chilling_effect

We all know what a chilling effect is. You have no right to communicate on signal. This does not apply.

> Neither is violently undermining our Constitutional order.

Ah, the "ends justify the means" then? Is this something you want applied _against_ you? Seems reckless.

> These folks should be on notice that they will be prosecuted.

They will not.

> If we played by Trump’s book

Moral relativism will turn you into the thing you profess to hate.

> we’d charge them with treason and then let them appeal against the death penalty for the rest of their lives.

Words have actual meaning. We're clearly past that and just choosing words that match emotional states. If you don't want to fix anything and just want to demonstrate your frustrations then this will work. If you want something to change you stand no chance with this attitude.

I'm not choosing sides. I'm simply saying if you want to avoid FBI attention then take your heart off your sleeve and smarten up.

> played by Trump’s book

I'm betting that's exactly what will happen - the FBI will single out some core organisers and let them serve as an example.

Realistically, we now know that the Hunter Biden Pardon (preemptive) is available and the Capitol Riots Pardon (mass pardon) is available. Given that, it’s only optimal for an outgoing cynical Republican President to preemptively pardon his allies on the street.

Their stated purpose and their actual function can be different, and speech that would otherwise be free can be illegal if involved in incitement, bribery, collusion, etc.

If I’m having a conversation with my friend, it’s free speech. If we’re plotting the overthrow of the government, it’s insurrection.

I would assume that, had Renee Good not been shot, and also not escaped the scene, she would have been. I would imagine that many of the other US citizens supposedly arrested "simply for exercising free speech rights" will be in due course, too.

I am talking about 8 USC chapter 12 subsection II (<https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/chapter-12>). This is the law that defines how immigration works in the US, and how illegal aliens are removed. ICE is the Federal agency assigned to the task of locating and removing illegal aliens. Even if you don’t like that illegal aliens are being removed, it is illegal to try to prevent a federal agent from doing just that. Instead you should be trying to change the law so that the job doesn’t exist.

> Filming officiers performing their jobs is not obstruction

This is irrelevant, because many people have been observed physically obstructing officers, whether or not they were filming at the time.

> If it makes their jobs harder

Have you heard the constant blowing of whistles in these videos? Did you know that protesters have organized the mass 3d-printing and distribution of these whistles (https://www.minnpost.com/metro/2025/12/not-just-a-toy-how-wh... ; https://www.startribune.com/whistle-symbol-ice-protest-minne... ; https://chicago.suntimes.com/immigration/2026/01/21/chicagoa...)? Can you imagine how this level of noise interferes with a job that involves verbal communication with both coworkers and civilians?

> Even now Democrats refuse to support abolishing ICE

I'm not mistaken in my understanding that Tim Walz is a Democrat, am I? The one making public speeches falsely claiming that ICE aren't LEO and encouraging "peaceful protest" without mentioning anything about obstruction of justice or resisting arrest?

And you're aware that the Signal groups in question are alleged to include Democratic state officials and a campaign advisor?

For that matter, exactly what do you mean by "abolishing ICE"? Should it not be replaced? Should immigration law not be enforced? Should the USA allow everyone to reside within its borders who wishes to do so, with no barriers to entry?

This is an inaccurate description of what they are doing. For example Renee Good was actively blockading a street, by placing her car perpendicularly across it. Some may be engaged in observation, but that is not broadly the case, and organizationally, their apparent goal is to obstruct.