Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez grilled DHS chief Kevin McAleenanHe was also asked several times about a secret Facebook group of current and former Border Patrol agents that contained more than 10,000 members and included posts mocking migrants and the deaths of children in custody and suggesting harm to Democratic lawmakers. After the group's existence was revealed by a ProPublica report, McAleenan announced DHS was investigating the "disturbing" and "inexcusable" posts.
...McAleenan shot back after Ocasio-Cortez asked about whether the separating of children and families led to a "dehumanizing culture" within Customs and Border Protection. "We do not have a dehumanizing culture at CBP," he said touting that the agency, "rescues 4,000 people a year" and is "committed to the well-being of everyone that they interact with."
He said the posts were "unacceptable" but "I don't think it's fair to apply them to the entire organization or that even the members of that group believed or supported those posts."
The rape culture in our government runs to the top. We should really expect that his system would treat those he hates with any humanity? The cruelty's the point, in his politics and in his personal life.
Good job, AOC.
I’m old enough to remember when liberals supported free speech.
I’m old enough to remember when liberals supported free speech.
Still do. Bit govt employees on the clock have some limits to their speech. Posting rape pics about someone appears to go over the line. Perhaps not illegal, but certainly grounds for disciplinary action. If you can’t stand criticism without such a response, look for another job. Run for office, for example.
Still do. Bit govt employees on the clock have some limits to their speech. Posting rape pics about someone appears to go over the line. Perhaps not illegal, but certainly grounds for disciplinary action. If you can’t stand criticism without such a response, look for another job. Run for office, for example.
So you're not bothered by the culture of violence?
The rape culture in our government runs to the top. We should really expect that his system would treat those he hates with any humanity? The cruelty's the point, in his politics and in his personal life.
Good job, AOC.
Do you have any evidence that they were on the clock when these things were posted?
I’m old enough to remember when liberals supported free speech.
I will actually make it even broader and claim that government employees can be fired even when they are off the clock for certain forms of speech.
When people get such jobs sign contracts which include many restrictions of the "freedom of speech." Take for example the case of the military. Do you think that an officer who is found to say kneel in front of the flag when he is off the clock that he will avoid consequences?
That is precisely the sort of political speech protected by Pickering vs. Board of Education.
That is precisely the sort of political speech protected by Pickering vs. Board of Education.
As I said, I’m old enough to remember when liberals supported free speech.
From what I know SCOTUS does not recognize unlimited freedom of political speech even inside a class. If the speech disrupts the classroom then the speech is not protected.
p.s. found it
Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Cmty. Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503 (1969)
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District - Wikipedia
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969), was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court that defined First Amendment rights of students in U.S. public schools. The Tinker test, also known as the "substantial disruption" test, is still used by courts today to determine whether a school's interest to prevent disruption infringes upon students' First Amendment rights....
...
The Court held that for school officials to justify censoring speech, they "must be able to show that [their] action was caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint," that the conduct that would "materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school."
Really, because I remember a little different attitude from cultists when a couple was sharing bedroom talk, expressing there work and their personal beliefs ( turned out to be 100% accurate) that trump was unfit for office.
That was two people and cultists are still claiming the FBI is corrupt...
This is thousands...
I have no idea what you think this has to do with anything.
I have no idea what you think this has to do with anything.
Get back to me when someone in that Facebook group is investigating AOC.
Do you have any evidence that they were on the clock when these things were posted?
Still do. Bit govt employees on the clock have some limits to their speech. Posting rape pics about someone appears to go over the line. Perhaps not illegal, but certainly grounds for disciplinary action. If you can’t stand criticism without such a response, look for another job. Run for office, for example.
From what I know SCOTUS does not recognize unlimited freedom of political speech in education. If the speech disrupts the class then the speech is not protected.
p.s. found it
Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Cmty. Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503 (1969)
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District - Wikipedia
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969), was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court that defined First Amendment rights of students in U.S. public schools. The Tinker test, also known as the "substantial disruption" test, is still used by courts today to determine whether a school's interest to prevent disruption infringes upon students' First Amendment rights....
...
The Court held that for school officials to justify censoring speech, they "must be able to show that [their] action was caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint," that the conduct that would "materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school."
You did not explain why you thought it was a good idea to bring the case you mentioned from education to make a point. But let's bypass the sudden change of tone (after I brought another SCOTUS case of free speech in education) and see the issue more broadly
no they don't please see the first amendment.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?