More history from this Nazi adulated by the Trump team. These are explicit, proud Nazis who scream and cry and call every referee they can find when you quote their Nazism back to them.

My piece quotes the Supreme Court in the 1987 case of City of Houston v. Hill: “The freedom of individuals verbally to oppose or challenge police action without thereby risking arrest is one of the principal characteristics by which we distinguish a free nation from a police state.” /7, end

Explicit agency acknowledgment of a right to record would make a vital first step in turning around abusive informal cop culture. As federal courts have found, filming police serves goals of truth, public information, and accountability that are central to First Amendment law and a free republic. /6

It's entirely routine after a journalist, local lawmaker or citizen activist with a phone gets roughed up for DHS to claim that person had assaulted or obstructed agents. It's often hard for outsiders to weigh the conflicting stories (and especially, of course, if footage is unavailable!) /5

BREAKING: Apple removed an app for preserving TikToks, Instagram reels, news reports, and videos documenting abuses by ICE

🔗 www.404media.co/apple-banned...

#TheTroops™️ are starting to get grumpy

Discworld QOTD, from The Wee Free Men

Ok everyone, I’m assigning you your resistance homework for the week.

Everyone ready?

Do something silly that makes you smile. I just waved at a dog that had its head out the car window because it made me happy. Don’t let the assholes take your joy.

The airport next to Maralago now says on the FAA National Airspace System status website that it is closed to weather modification aircraft.

What in the hell???

nasstatus.faa.gov

It's interesting seeing the different ways resistance has formed in different cities. Los Angeles Organized, Chicago Radicalized, and Portland Got Weird as Fuck. All 3 have had success unifying their respective cities.

I guess my point is there are multiple paths to ungovernability.

I hate to quibble, but the description of selvedge in that clip is wrong.

A 3-1 twill will have an uneven selvedge. When making a wide selvedge what one does is have a number of warp ends set to weave plain-weave,and so have a band which is tighter,and more closed.

It me. I can walk much more easily than I can stand - and I walk pretty fast. Still disabled. Still need a seat

Ellis also makes clear she doesn't want DHS to just distribute the order, she wants to make sure DHS implements the order and has its agents comply.

Ellis says she thinks "the compromise position here" is for agents to have alphanumeric IDs that don't necessarily display their names.

"What I don't want to hear is that the officers thought there was some risk and put tape over the numbers so they can't be identified," she says.

Ellis getting into her concerns over plainclothes agents.

She says she's willing to give some leeway to "undercover" officers, but says other agents, including those doing crowd control at protests, need to have ID that "identifies them numerically and by agency."

He also calls the Broadview facility a "detention center," which is the first time I've heard someone representing the federal govt openly call it that.

Discussion continuing over the narrowness of the order's applicability. Plaintiff atty says he doesn't want agents to think, "There's Reverend Black, I'm not gonna shoot him but I'm gonna shoot someone else."

The attorney gestures to Black, who's in the courtroom, as he speaks.

Both sides are springboarding off that hypothetical to try and bolster their arguments, but Ellis is maintaining she needs more time to consider everything.

She also acknowledges that appeals are likely to follow.

"This is not the only time a judge is gonna look at this order," she says.

Ellis says she will enter the restraining order not today, but tomorrow, given the complexities the attorneys have raised today around acceptable use of force, use of specific weapons and the resulting Fourth Amendment concerns.

Ellis maintains that federal agents can order journalists to move "as long as the journalist has objectively reasonable time to comply," along with another qualifier I didn't catch.

But she doesn't add in the govt's suggested language re: using force to do so. Says that language is "redundant."

Ellis says the govt has asked the court to stay the restraining order pending appeal.

Denied. The judge finds the govt "did not explain why a stay would be warranted," among other issues.

Ellis says the order will direct "agents and officers to follow the training they've already received... and is essentially directing them to follow their own rules, policies, regulations... and the behavior that the constitution demands."

The judge finds that because "defendants' conduct likely violates the First Amendnent," factors weigh in favor of entering a restraining order against them.

She will not limit the order to the Broadview facility, but will limit it to the northern (court) district of Illinois.

Ellis finds the plaintiffs have demonstrated a likelihood of success on allegations that feds' "expression of force... is unreasonable and excessive" in response to peaceful protests.