Aggressive federal response in Portland raises legal questions

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

PORTLAND, Ore. – In one video, a man clad in black at a protest raises his arms and shakes his head as two men in green military fatigues walk toward him. Without a word, they grab his arm and take him to an unmarked van parked across the street.

In another video, a woman lies face down on the ground before a group of men in street clothes yank her to her feet and take her to an unmarked car. "Who is it? Who are you?" a bystander screams.

Before the car speeds away, one of the men says, "If you follow us, you will get shot. Do you understand me?"

The widely circulated videos, at the heart of a lawsuit filed by Oregon's attorney general against the Trump administration, raise questions about the legality of the federal government's aggressive response to the unrest in Portland, where protests over police brutality and racial injustice have stretched into several weeks.

The events could present a legal test on how far the federal government can go in asserting its authority in cities where federal assistance is neither requested nor, local political leaders say, desired.

"What they can’t do without an invitation from Portland and/or Oregon is attempt to enforce Oregon laws or Portland ordinances. Those are state and local responsibilities," said Michael Dorf, a constitutional law professor at Cornell University. "If the situation were such that you thought that the city of Portland was conspiring with people who are rioting and violating federal rights, then there might be authority for some federal action."

https://www.yahoo.com/news/mess-aggressive-federal-response-portland-223521750.html

[elleng]

1. "What they can't do without an invitation from Portland and/or Oregon is

attempt to enforce Oregon laws or Portland ordinances. Those are state and local responsibilities," said Michael Dorf, a constitutional law professor at Cornell University. "

GOOD to see some legal analysis.

[regnaD kciN]

3. I'm sure the administration would say they're "enforcing federal laws"...

...but that raises a second question of which laws each person detained was breaking and what is their evidence? It's going to be hard to assert that it is a good-faith effort to enforce federal laws when you're just picking up people many blocks from any federal property and holding them for several hours, then releasing them without any charges or even any allegation of charges.

[LizBeth]

2. No one knows who they are or able to question or know where taken. RW'er could dress up in cameo

a throw anyone in a van. This is a horrible situation. Grab women and take off, young teens and take off. We do not know.

[regnaD kciN]

4. And I'm sure some militia turds are considering that even now...

Grab some people who "look like demonstrators," drive them off into the woods and torture and kill them. When the victims are reported as missing, everyone will just assume the federal goons took them. Of course, the feds will deny it, but few will believe them and, by the time they find the bodies, the killers will have gotten off scot-free.

[LizBeth]

5. Who knows? I mean creepy MRA man dress up, kidnap and rape at will, go to the next.

Threaten you follow, we will shoot to kill. Just too far wrong for this to be happening.

[Chainfire]

6. Fascist tactics have come to our streets

and we have to figure out how to deal with it. Of course, in the end, we will probably deal with it the way the Germans did in the 1930s; ignore it and hope it will go away.