From: atropos@mac.com
On Jan 10, 2026 at 6:18:12 PM PST, ""Adam H. Kerman"" wrote:
> BTR1701 wrote:
>
>> Gonna sit back and pop some popcorn for this one.
>
>>
>> https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/2009954599965499392/pu/v
d/avc1/1434x1080/uHIzLe-MUeaGGVri.mp4
>
> Hey! Masks are a Sarbanes-Oxley violation! You are obligated to create
> evidence against interest! The feds have prosecuted people for this,
> Fifth Amendment be damned.
>
> As to your basic point, if wearing a mask is speech, I don't see how
> denying this right preserves democracy.
While that might be an alternative argument, my basic point is that the
Supremacy Clause gives the federal government the power to regulate the
behavior, equipment, and attire of federal agents. The state of Pennsylvania
doesn't get to impose a dress code on federal law enforcement officers. The
chief of police doesn't get a vote on what they can and can't wear while
enforcing federal law.
How would this even work as a practical matter? Let's say ICE is out on the
street conducting a lawful, constitutional immigration enforcement operation
and the Philly PD rolls up, sees some of them are wearing masks... and then
what?
Are they going to pull their guns on the federal agents and order them to get
down on the ground and put their hands behind their backs? Because if they did
that, they'd find themselves under arrest themselves for obstruction and
interference with a federal operation/investigation. That's a felony with a
maximum sentence of 10 years in a federal pound-you-in-the-ass prison. And
it'll be a special treat for them to arrive there as former cops.
What cop is going to risk all that to act as a pawn in the mayor or chief's
political games with Trump?
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
