I feel the best remedy for this is for states to begin disregarding Supreme Court’s decisions. Similarly to how states disregarded Roe or gun laws. I was angered when I saw New York adhering to the court’s decision on overturning their restriction on carrying handguns. I feel Ross should be arrested by Minnesotan authorities and tried in their courts. If the Supreme Court orders his release or overturns a conviction, Minnesotan leaders should tell them to “go to hell”. What are they going to do about it?
Noem helped him go into hiding, Ice agents went to his home and retrieved his belongings because he cant go home now we know who he is, we know where he was living!
"We either resist it or we accept it. There is no third option."
One fucking hundred, Christopher. This entire piece. State, county and local law enforcement are refusing to do their jobs. Kidnapping, murder, harassment etc are occurring on their beat, with their assistance - that's not LE, that's accessory. And if LE obstructs the course of serving and protecting the public, then the State National Guard must be activated. What's their purpose if not for this very moment.
What happened in Minneapolis — where an ICE agent shot and killed Renee Nicole Good, a U.S. citizen, during a federal immigration operation — is not just a tragic loss of life;
it is a grotesque violation of the Constitution and an outrageous abuse of federal power.
Federal agents working for ICE and the Department of Homeland Security are not emperors above the law, yet they currently operate with lethal force policies and protections that functionally allow them to execute people without meaningful oversight, prosecution, or accountability.
The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division has reportedly refused to even open an investigation into this killing, while the FBI has taken exclusive control of the probe and blocked Minnesota state authorities from accessing vital evidence and witnesses. That only deepens the appearance that the federal government will protect its own agents from consequences, even when innocent lives are lost and public trust is shattered.
Allowing ICE, DHS, and DOJ to act as judge, jury, and executioner — killing someone, then shielding the shooter from scrutiny — is a betrayal of due process and constitutional rights. We cannot tolerate a system where federal agents operate with impunity, where policies that permit deadly force are applied without transparency, and where accountability is denied to the victims and their families. This must end.
Do you recall the Terri Schaivo case from years ago? Look it up.
The Republicans go on and on about states' rights when they're OUT of power. They call the courts 'activist courts' until the Supreme Court gets stacked with right wing true believers. This progression to authoritarian proclivities started long ago. Rule of law arguments by them are farcical.
You’re identifying a really important pattern here - and it’s not just Republicans. It’s what the system produces.
When you’re out of power: advocate for states’ rights, judicial restraint, limited federal authority
When you’re in power: use federal power, pack courts, expand executive authority
Democrats do this too. Obama expanded executive power (drone strikes, deportations). Trump used it. Biden used it. Now Trump again. Each side complains about overreach when the other side does it, then uses the same tools when they’re in charge.
This isn’t hypocrisy - it’s what the current architecture SELECTS FOR. The system rewards whoever holds power for using it maximally. There’s no institutional design that penalizes overreach or creates accountability that survives power transitions.
That’s exactly what Armitage’s piece is about. When accountability mechanisms (like qualified immunity) protect agents regardless of who’s president, when oversight bodies report to the people they’re investigating, when courts systematically close off remedies - you get an architecture that PRODUCES impunity.
The solution isn’t finding politicians with better principles. It’s redesigning the accountability architecture so it functions regardless of who’s in power. Independent oversight. Real consequences for exceeding authority. Professional standards that can’t be dismantled every four years.
Right now we’re stuck in a cycle: outraged when the other team does it, defensive when our team does it. The architecture never changes.
Yes both side do it, but the present administration has gone beyond in its use. This administration uses it as if it has no bounds (which it does)
They ignore congress and the senate. The Supreme Court is just a rubber stamp the republicans except a very very few speak out however the democrats have spoken out many times against their own president
You’re right that Democrats have been more restrained. But that actually proves the structural problem.
We shouldn’t need to rely on one party having better morals. The architecture should constrain ANYONE who tries to abuse power - regardless of party.
Right now, the system depends on leaders choosing to self-restrain. When Trump chooses not to, there’s very little that actually stops him. That’s not a Trump problem - that’s an architecture problem.
We have the architecture in place, but trump, miller and the rest don’t adhere to them. They ignore the laws, the courts and the republicans and the supreme court do nothing to stop them.
You just described the structural problem perfectly.
If the architecture ‘exists’ but can be ignored without consequence, then it’s not functional architecture - it’s decorative.
We’ve been relying on democratic norms instead of actual enforcement. Remember when presidents released their tax returns? That wasn’t a law with teeth - it was a tradition. Trump showed up and said ‘yeah, no’ and there was nothing to enforce it. That’s what I mean by suggestions.
Real accountability architecture means: when you exceed your authority, consequences happen automatically. Not ‘someone should probably do something.’ Actual enforcement built into the system.
That’s not architecture holding. That’s architecture failing.
The constraints the founders built assumed enforcement. Congress impeaches, courts rule, officials comply or face consequences. When any piece of that chain breaks and there’s no backup mechanism, the whole thing collapses.
We’re learning the hard way: rules without enforcement aren’t architecture. They’re suggestions.
True. We are both saying essentially the same thing. Have you read, "The Shadow Docket:, etc. I can't remember the full title right now. We went to see the author, a couple Univ. of Washington law people at Townhall Seattle some time ago. They never answered my deep question later. I saw them exchange looks. I'll go find the full title. It was a best seller at NYT. 😟
The level of destruction does to this county and its constitution are unprecedented in American history and only in one year. I understand your point but democrats never stole all levers of government to imprison, subjugate, kill their perceived enemies.
It goes much further than that, but the system is not currently holding and just might collapse.
You’re absolutely right that the scale and speed are unprecedented. And you’ve nailed something crucial: ‘the system is not currently holding.’
Right now it’s individual acts of heroism - Mike Pence on Jan 6, judges defying pressure, whistleblowers risking everything. That’s not how the architecture is supposed to work. When the system depends on individual courage rather than institutional constraints, it’s already failed.
The War on Terror systematically dismantled the constraints the founders tried to build. Emergency powers that were supposed to be temporary became permanent. Surveillance authorities that were supposed to have oversight became normalized. Qualified immunity expanded from reasonable protection to near-total impunity. Torture got redefined. Detention without trial became standard.
Conservatives drove much of this - they WANTED unchecked executive power when they held it. Then Democrats inherited the expanded powers and mostly kept them rather than dismantling what Bush built. Each administration weakens the constraints a bit more. Trump 1.0 pushed further. Now Trump 2.0 is discovering there’s almost nothing left to constrain him.
That’s why structural work is so urgent. We need Congress to sunset the permanent “emergency” powers they handed the executive branch. We need accountability mechanisms with real teeth. We need institutional constraints that function regardless of individual morality.
Right now we’re relying on heroes. Trump and Heritage learned from his first term that heroes were the constraint - which is exactly why they’ve spent years systematically removing them. Firing independent officials, installing loyalists, purging civil service protections. They understand what we need to understand: when the system depends on individual courage, that’s a vulnerability you can exploit by removing those individuals.
We need architecture that works even when cowards are in charge - because they’ve figured out how to make sure only cowards remain
Great and thorough thread here. Last comment, Jason, perfect. It's been 1 chip at a time over many years undermining this already flawed Constitution. The real people expressing learned helplessness, consumerism, the failure to regulate corporations, gun culture, Citizens United, etc.
It is exhausting. So exhausting. That's why I want to address the structural problems, so people can go back to living their lives (a la my essay "Democracy Shouldn't Require Heroic Effort). Right individual heroics are all that are holding it together, it's unsustainable.
As well as originalists. They come to the decision they want , then come up with some twisted argument that supposedly supports it. At this rate, slavery will be legal again.
Totally. I'm an older person. We have been living witnesses to the twisting of Constitution to enable ALL these crooks and killers of BOTH parties. The Supreme 'activist' Court is the ultimate insult/fraud for this fraudulent 'democracy'!!!!!!
This us nothing new with republicans they have big mouths when out of power, but when they have power they shrink and go silent with their heads up their up their ass, they have no morals or commitment to their oath of office
We all witnessed the attack on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021 as it happened.
People died and approximately 140 law enforcement officers were injured. US Senators and Representatives fled the building for their own safety except for Illinois Representative Adam Kinzinger, who remained to defend against these domestic terrorists. Dozens of people from the Trump Administration testified about what occurred prior to and during the attack.
On Trump's second inauguration, he pardoned 1400+ of these convicted felons and others.
Deborah you ask a great question one that I have asked myself many times. It’s difficult to understand how people can watch with their own eyes and listen with their own ears and not see what is happening to our country. I have spoken to some of these people and they just say trump is right they have no reasoning and just refuse to accept reality. I feel they are just bigoted, racist people with little moral character. I hate to say that but I can’t think of any other reason. For them whatever trump and his followers do seems to be ok with them. I can’t wait for the midterms.
Adam Kintzinger did not stay behind to defend the Capitol. The only people who defended the Capitol were the Capitol Police, the Washington, DC Metropolitan Police, and later on the National Guard. Every Congressman and Senator there was evacuated to safer, secret quarters to save their lives. That includes VP Pence. Adam Kintzinger and Liz Cheney were the only two Republican who were part of the Jan. 6 Committee which took a deep dive into what really happened that day. They called many witnesses, both Democrats and Republicans, although some people refused to testify (hard-core loyalists of Trump) and did a thorough investigation. It was all televised. As a result of this, Kintzinger and Cheney's political careers ended because they were cast out of the Republican Party. Trump pardoned at least 1500 (or more) J-6 Insurrectionists on his first day in office of his second term by Executive Order. Just wanted to make sure you got the facts correct. Also, Brian Sicknick died (he was a Capitol Policeman) the day after the Insurrection as a direct result of his injuries sustained, and 8 other policemen committed suicide within two weeks of the Insurrection as a direct result of that day. Many others suffered lifelong injuries and are permanently disabled. And now Trump and the Republicans are refusing to put up a plaque that calls the brave police of that day "heroes." Some of the pardoned Insurrectionists are currently back in prison for sex crimes against children and vehicular homicide while driving drunk. I'm sure a lot of the others are now ICE Agents.
Agree on every point in your well-stated comment, but only slightly disagree on Kinzinger..
In two interviews, I heard him describe that he stayed in his office with a loaded gun. So that may not have been “defending the Capitol”, but it was the only form of resistance that a member of Congress demonstrated that I have any knowledge of.
Again, Kudos on a brilliant summary of the insurrection and the House hearings. I watched them and believe they will play an important part in our country’s history
I called my governor yesterday. Reminded her the primary reason governments exist, above all other considerations, is to provide collective security. Tell your state officials that this is a deadly serious moment that requires deadly serious decisions, and the time of fucking around is long past.
Outstanding structural analysis. The progression from Pierson → Harlow → Ziglar shows how judicial decisions gradually built an architecture of impunity - not one dramatic change, just incremental degradation until accountability mechanisms effectively disappear.
Your state prosecution angle highlights something crucial: federalism creates redundancy. When federal accountability fails, state authority provides a backup mechanism. This is actually how distributed power is SUPPOSED to work.
The challenge, of course, is that only some states will exercise this authority. But that’s still structurally significant - partial resistance is better than no resistance.
While reading this, I realized this might be one of the major structural differences between our situation and, say, Weimar Germany: we have 50 semi-sovereign jurisdictions with actual enforcement power. Not all will resist federal overreach, but some will. That creates friction, litigation, public documentation of what’s happening. It’s not perfect protection, but it’s real.
Your tactical proposals matter immediately. State prosecution creates accountability when federal systems refuse to. That’s not just necessary - it’s how the architecture is designed to function when one level fails.
Watching the video of Renee Good’s shooting, I was struck that this event is indistinguishable from a carjacking gone wrong. Masked thugs with guns yell and swear, rushing her vehicle, try to pull her out, shoot her as she leaves, then jump into their own vehicle and flee the scene. Prosecute these criminals.
I hear the clarity in what Chris is saying, and I don’t think it comes from fantasy or thrill. It comes from watching the rule of law hollow out while people keep insisting that patience is a virtue even when patience is being used against us. He’s naming something real: an enforcement apparatus that increasingly operates without visibility, without accountability, and without fear of consequence. History doesn’t treat that pattern gently.
He’s also right about this much: incrementalism has failed. Quiet memos, task forces, commissions, and politely worded condemnations don’t restrain power that has already decided it can act without cost. When agents conceal their identities, refuse to identify authority, and use lethal force against civilians, something foundational has already broken. Calling that out plainly matters.
But clarity cuts both ways.
Authoritarian systems don’t collapse when confronted. They consolidate. They wait for the moment when resistance crosses a line that can be reframed as disorder. They don’t need a mass uprising. They need a single incident that can be looped on cable news, cited in emergency orders, and used to justify escalation. One dead officer. A handful of wounded. One chaotic confrontation caught on a shaky phone camera. That’s all it takes.
From that moment on, restraint is no longer on the table. Federalization follows. Militarization follows. Governors lose discretion. Courts defer. The language shifts from enforcement to security, from rights to stabilization. The very acts meant to restore the rule of law become the pretext for suspending it entirely.
That’s not speculation. It’s how every modern authoritarian transition accelerates.
So the question isn’t whether Chris is right about the danger. He is. The question is whether the form of resistance we choose denies power its preferred outcome or hands it over wrapped in justification.
States absolutely have authority to prosecute crimes committed within their borders. That power shouldn’t be surrendered. But how it’s exercised matters as much as whether it’s exercised. Quiet, methodical prosecution backed by airtight evidence, civilian witnesses, bodycam footage, and public transparency weakens impunity over time. It builds records that survive hostile courts. It denies the federal government the spectacle it wants.
Open confrontation in the street does the opposite. It invites force. It shortens the fuse. It collapses moral asymmetry into visual chaos. And once bullets start flying between uniforms, the public conversation is over. At that point, it doesn’t matter who was right first. What matters is who controls the response.
This administration is not afraid of conflict. It is organized around it. It wants resistance to look like disorder so it can present itself as the only remaining source of order. Violent civil reciprocity is not a risk here. It’s the strategy being baited.
None of this means standing down. It means resisting in ways that are harder to criminalize, harder to caricature, and harder to crush. Lawfare instead of street confrontation. Documentation instead of spectacle. Relentless exposure instead of reactive escalation. State power used surgically, not theatrically.
The most dangerous mistake right now would be confusing urgency with speed. Authoritarianism doesn’t fear urgency. It fears legitimacy slipping quietly out of reach.
If resistance triggers militarization, the next phase won’t be about immigration enforcement or public safety. It will be about internal security. And once that threshold is crossed, the space for lawful resistance shrinks to almost nothing.
We need to be clear-eyed enough to see that trap before stepping into it.
The fight isn’t whether the law still exists. It’s whether we let power decide when and how force becomes the answer. If we hand them that moment, they will not give it back.
Resistance must continue. But it must deny the regime the escalation it’s waiting for, not deliver it on schedule.
Dino, this is exactly the kind of strategic thinking the moment requires. You’re right that authoritarian systems don’t just tolerate confrontation - they weaponize it. The escalation trap is real.
And yet Armitage is also right: quiet patience while agents operate with complete impunity isn’t sustainable either. That’s acquiescence with better optics.
This feels like our bailing water versus patching holes conversation again. Methodical state prosecution is necessary NOW (bailing water). Structural reform that creates durable accountability is necessary LATER (patching holes). Neither tactic alone fixes the underlying architecture.
What bothers me is we’re debating tactics because we lack the architecture that would make either approach work reliably. Functional accountability would mean: independent oversight with enforcement authority, clear consequences for exceeding lawful authority, professional standards enforceable regardless of political will. The kind of institutional design that makes refusing unlawful orders professionally safer than complying with them.
We don’t have that. And neither tactical patience nor tactical confrontation builds it.
Your point about denying them the escalation they want is well taken. But we also can’t let ‘avoiding their trap’ become learned helplessness where we’re so afraid of playing into their hands that we never actually impose consequences.
States using their authority carefully and methodically (as you describe) keeps us alive long enough to build the structural reforms that create accountability regardless of who’s in power. We need both.
Excellent! It's why I try to do more direct actions. I still do peace marches at times (MLK Day). I noted years ago that the system just ignores us. The MSM may report, but it features the violence to shift blame or responsibility away from this unjust system. Thank you. ✌️
Now that 60 Minutes has been neutered, Christopher Armitage is becoming a superior voice in critical investigative journalism, at least to me. With this report on the track record of an agency that has become a lethal goon squad, I now know why ICE agents are so violently inclined. And to be under the direction of a racist, violent man adds to our despair. However, I see state prosecutions being applied in states that reject Trump's authority. So much of this feels like the winds of a civil war. It is not what we want, but it may be inevitable if the murders of our peaceful citizens continue. It is not the time to be on the sidelines; citizens must be engaged and defend our democracy or else.
It is horrifying to have it spelled out so clearly just how disgusting ICE was even BEFORE this administration!! Back then, ICE actually had SOME basic requirements and standards for hiring!! Now they actually seek out the worst of the worst bottom feeders!! Every state MUST step up and fight back!!
Absolutely agree with all three of Chris’ points in the column. From what little I’ve seen about Agent Ross, he appears to be a Minnesota resident (at least that’s what I read). Given that we have prima facie evidence that he was the shooter—and that he’s clearly a significant flight risk—why hasn’t Minnesota taken him into custody already?
I’m not a lawyer, but under the circumstances, I’ve got to believe that a court would have little trouble agreeing that he should remain incarcerated until the investigation is complete and a decision on indicting him on state charges is made. That might even help get the FBI to share whatever findings it reaches in whatever investigation it actually conducts. I would also think this would send a message to the remaining ICE agents that the regime’s pronouncements notwithstanding, there are consequences for egregious actions. Furthermore, if the regime abandons him, it would send an even more powerful message to the ICE rank and file that the regime isn’t serious about protecting them.
The Minneapolis Chief of Police (I believe that's who it was) was interviewed shortly after the shooting and gave incredibly mealy-mouthed answers. Why wasn't the shooter arrested? He talked about federal jurisdiction and immunity and the wonderful cooperation between federal and local law enforcement. All B.S.! Now the shooter is in protective custody (hiding) and they'll just wait until it blows over and forget the whole thing. There will be some fresh outrage that makes everyone stop talking about it. Kinda like the Epstein files.
Thank you, Christopher, for this thoroughly researched piece. Please send this to blue-state officials, in particular to Minnesota officials who seem to be “pearl-clutchers.“
Ron, you can support by buying copies of Chris' booklet, printing out this column, and mailing a copy to your Blue pols, or a Blue state of your choice. Government, AG, etc.
Yes, maybe, but YOU are apparently a voter in CA. How much more sway can you have?? Interacting here to know more profoundly in your heart that you are creating a chance to stand up for what's right.
Maybe Chris will address the issue, maybe calling on Mark Kelley and Elissa Slotkin and the others who made the video to tell the military not to obey illegal orders, how they can know when to draw the line...
Christopher, you spell things out so clearly and accurately. I just want to thank you for your heroic efforts in keeping us informed, engaged, and sane.
Chris's ideas are what need to happen. My concern is state officials as well as city and state law enforcement do not have the political WILL to implement this state level of enforcement. Because the underlying word here is ENFORCEMENT. How on earth do we enforce state judicial authority? Any attempt by state and local officials to enforce our state laws will be resisted by ICE itself and the federal regime that has enabled and protected them. We can already see what happened in MN - they attempted to start and investigation into the Renee Good murder and got immediately shut down by the FBI and the regime. Are state officials continuing to pursue the investigation? Can they? I mean, these ideas seem like our only hope but they also seem so far from actually getting implemented for many reasons. As Chris has advocated, putting massive public pressure on our state officials should goad them into taking action, but so far, nothing of the sort is happening anywhere - CA, OR, WA, IL, MA, NY, etc. Or am I missing something?
Just yesterday I sent five letters pleading for them to start taking action - to my 3 MOCs, the AG, and the Governor. This is the second time I've done this and I've been encouraging my family and friends to do it. Alas, few have, if any... to my knowledge. What is it about concerned people that they can't do the small task of sending emails or calling? Are they afraid? So many people I know seem almost numbed into inaction.
Our AG in WA state has filed lawsuits against this regime. Bob Ferguson is our former AG. Some judges are still ruling against these criminal enablers. We shall see if some action is taken to protect us in this case.
In addition, my perception over time is that large numbers of "elected" officials at city and state levels are also corrupt.
Thanks for that - we can be extremely pleased with Nick Brown and Bob Ferguson. And yes, plenty of elected officials are sympathetic to the regime’s goals.
Yup. A disruptive approach must be applied broadly to oppose the aggressively fascist actions being taken by the GOP and Trump administration. Otherwise they will continue to run roughshod over the People under the thin veils of “immigration enforcement” or “national security.”
I feel the best remedy for this is for states to begin disregarding Supreme Court’s decisions. Similarly to how states disregarded Roe or gun laws. I was angered when I saw New York adhering to the court’s decision on overturning their restriction on carrying handguns. I feel Ross should be arrested by Minnesotan authorities and tried in their courts. If the Supreme Court orders his release or overturns a conviction, Minnesotan leaders should tell them to “go to hell”. What are they going to do about it?
Noem helped him go into hiding, Ice agents went to his home and retrieved his belongings because he cant go home now we know who he is, we know where he was living!
"We either resist it or we accept it. There is no third option."
One fucking hundred, Christopher. This entire piece. State, county and local law enforcement are refusing to do their jobs. Kidnapping, murder, harassment etc are occurring on their beat, with their assistance - that's not LE, that's accessory. And if LE obstructs the course of serving and protecting the public, then the State National Guard must be activated. What's their purpose if not for this very moment.
RESIST
RESIST
RESIST
RESIST
RESIST
RESIST
RESIST
What happened in Minneapolis — where an ICE agent shot and killed Renee Nicole Good, a U.S. citizen, during a federal immigration operation — is not just a tragic loss of life;
it is a grotesque violation of the Constitution and an outrageous abuse of federal power.
Federal agents working for ICE and the Department of Homeland Security are not emperors above the law, yet they currently operate with lethal force policies and protections that functionally allow them to execute people without meaningful oversight, prosecution, or accountability.
The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division has reportedly refused to even open an investigation into this killing, while the FBI has taken exclusive control of the probe and blocked Minnesota state authorities from accessing vital evidence and witnesses. That only deepens the appearance that the federal government will protect its own agents from consequences, even when innocent lives are lost and public trust is shattered.
Allowing ICE, DHS, and DOJ to act as judge, jury, and executioner — killing someone, then shielding the shooter from scrutiny — is a betrayal of due process and constitutional rights. We cannot tolerate a system where federal agents operate with impunity, where policies that permit deadly force are applied without transparency, and where accountability is denied to the victims and their families. This must end.
Totally perfect comment. I'd only add one thing:
Do you recall the Terri Schaivo case from years ago? Look it up.
The Republicans go on and on about states' rights when they're OUT of power. They call the courts 'activist courts' until the Supreme Court gets stacked with right wing true believers. This progression to authoritarian proclivities started long ago. Rule of law arguments by them are farcical.
You’re identifying a really important pattern here - and it’s not just Republicans. It’s what the system produces.
When you’re out of power: advocate for states’ rights, judicial restraint, limited federal authority
When you’re in power: use federal power, pack courts, expand executive authority
Democrats do this too. Obama expanded executive power (drone strikes, deportations). Trump used it. Biden used it. Now Trump again. Each side complains about overreach when the other side does it, then uses the same tools when they’re in charge.
This isn’t hypocrisy - it’s what the current architecture SELECTS FOR. The system rewards whoever holds power for using it maximally. There’s no institutional design that penalizes overreach or creates accountability that survives power transitions.
That’s exactly what Armitage’s piece is about. When accountability mechanisms (like qualified immunity) protect agents regardless of who’s president, when oversight bodies report to the people they’re investigating, when courts systematically close off remedies - you get an architecture that PRODUCES impunity.
The solution isn’t finding politicians with better principles. It’s redesigning the accountability architecture so it functions regardless of who’s in power. Independent oversight. Real consequences for exceeding authority. Professional standards that can’t be dismantled every four years.
Right now we’re stuck in a cycle: outraged when the other team does it, defensive when our team does it. The architecture never changes.
Yes both side do it, but the present administration has gone beyond in its use. This administration uses it as if it has no bounds (which it does)
They ignore congress and the senate. The Supreme Court is just a rubber stamp the republicans except a very very few speak out however the democrats have spoken out many times against their own president
You’re right that Democrats have been more restrained. But that actually proves the structural problem.
We shouldn’t need to rely on one party having better morals. The architecture should constrain ANYONE who tries to abuse power - regardless of party.
Right now, the system depends on leaders choosing to self-restrain. When Trump chooses not to, there’s very little that actually stops him. That’s not a Trump problem - that’s an architecture problem.
The constraints need to be structural, not moral.
Totally!
We have the architecture in place, but trump, miller and the rest don’t adhere to them. They ignore the laws, the courts and the republicans and the supreme court do nothing to stop them.
You just described the structural problem perfectly.
If the architecture ‘exists’ but can be ignored without consequence, then it’s not functional architecture - it’s decorative.
We’ve been relying on democratic norms instead of actual enforcement. Remember when presidents released their tax returns? That wasn’t a law with teeth - it was a tradition. Trump showed up and said ‘yeah, no’ and there was nothing to enforce it. That’s what I mean by suggestions.
Real accountability architecture means: when you exceed your authority, consequences happen automatically. Not ‘someone should probably do something.’ Actual enforcement built into the system.
Right now: Trump ignores courts → nothing happens. Agents exceed authority → qualified immunity protects them. Officials refuse oversight → no enforcement mechanism.
That’s not architecture holding. That’s architecture failing.
The constraints the founders built assumed enforcement. Congress impeaches, courts rule, officials comply or face consequences. When any piece of that chain breaks and there’s no backup mechanism, the whole thing collapses.
We’re learning the hard way: rules without enforcement aren’t architecture. They’re suggestions.
Currently true it's Republicans. It's been done across these parties.
Here it is:
"The Shadow Docket: How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings To Amass Power and Undermine the Republic"
2023 or 24, I think. 🤔
True. We are both saying essentially the same thing. Have you read, "The Shadow Docket:, etc. I can't remember the full title right now. We went to see the author, a couple Univ. of Washington law people at Townhall Seattle some time ago. They never answered my deep question later. I saw them exchange looks. I'll go find the full title. It was a best seller at NYT. 😟
💯 Absolutely!! I'm a long term witness. Thanks for your addes comments. I support her: She is unique.
Read our platform here:
www.kshamasawant.org
And here:
www.workersstrikeback.org
The level of destruction does to this county and its constitution are unprecedented in American history and only in one year. I understand your point but democrats never stole all levers of government to imprison, subjugate, kill their perceived enemies.
It goes much further than that, but the system is not currently holding and just might collapse.
You’re absolutely right that the scale and speed are unprecedented. And you’ve nailed something crucial: ‘the system is not currently holding.’
Right now it’s individual acts of heroism - Mike Pence on Jan 6, judges defying pressure, whistleblowers risking everything. That’s not how the architecture is supposed to work. When the system depends on individual courage rather than institutional constraints, it’s already failed.
The War on Terror systematically dismantled the constraints the founders tried to build. Emergency powers that were supposed to be temporary became permanent. Surveillance authorities that were supposed to have oversight became normalized. Qualified immunity expanded from reasonable protection to near-total impunity. Torture got redefined. Detention without trial became standard.
Conservatives drove much of this - they WANTED unchecked executive power when they held it. Then Democrats inherited the expanded powers and mostly kept them rather than dismantling what Bush built. Each administration weakens the constraints a bit more. Trump 1.0 pushed further. Now Trump 2.0 is discovering there’s almost nothing left to constrain him.
That’s why structural work is so urgent. We need Congress to sunset the permanent “emergency” powers they handed the executive branch. We need accountability mechanisms with real teeth. We need institutional constraints that function regardless of individual morality.
Right now we’re relying on heroes. Trump and Heritage learned from his first term that heroes were the constraint - which is exactly why they’ve spent years systematically removing them. Firing independent officials, installing loyalists, purging civil service protections. They understand what we need to understand: when the system depends on individual courage, that’s a vulnerability you can exploit by removing those individuals.
We need architecture that works even when cowards are in charge - because they’ve figured out how to make sure only cowards remain
Great and thorough thread here. Last comment, Jason, perfect. It's been 1 chip at a time over many years undermining this already flawed Constitution. The real people expressing learned helplessness, consumerism, the failure to regulate corporations, gun culture, Citizens United, etc.
It's exhausting. Thank you. ✌️
It is exhausting. So exhausting. That's why I want to address the structural problems, so people can go back to living their lives (a la my essay "Democracy Shouldn't Require Heroic Effort). Right individual heroics are all that are holding it together, it's unsustainable.
As well as originalists. They come to the decision they want , then come up with some twisted argument that supposedly supports it. At this rate, slavery will be legal again.
Totally. I'm an older person. We have been living witnesses to the twisting of Constitution to enable ALL these crooks and killers of BOTH parties. The Supreme 'activist' Court is the ultimate insult/fraud for this fraudulent 'democracy'!!!!!!
It's always been legal. You just have to be arrested or imprisoned first. After that, you are a slave. Ask any inmate, anywhere.
This us nothing new with republicans they have big mouths when out of power, but when they have power they shrink and go silent with their heads up their up their ass, they have no morals or commitment to their oath of office
We all witnessed the attack on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021 as it happened.
People died and approximately 140 law enforcement officers were injured. US Senators and Representatives fled the building for their own safety except for Illinois Representative Adam Kinzinger, who remained to defend against these domestic terrorists. Dozens of people from the Trump Administration testified about what occurred prior to and during the attack.
On Trump's second inauguration, he pardoned 1400+ of these convicted felons and others.
WTF is wrong with this country?
Deborah you ask a great question one that I have asked myself many times. It’s difficult to understand how people can watch with their own eyes and listen with their own ears and not see what is happening to our country. I have spoken to some of these people and they just say trump is right they have no reasoning and just refuse to accept reality. I feel they are just bigoted, racist people with little moral character. I hate to say that but I can’t think of any other reason. For them whatever trump and his followers do seems to be ok with them. I can’t wait for the midterms.
It's lawless for most of the rich. trump should have gone to prison for both of his early crimes:
1. Real estate and bank fraud.
2. Sexual abuse of women, 34 actual convictions!
Probably much more crime.
Adam Kintzinger did not stay behind to defend the Capitol. The only people who defended the Capitol were the Capitol Police, the Washington, DC Metropolitan Police, and later on the National Guard. Every Congressman and Senator there was evacuated to safer, secret quarters to save their lives. That includes VP Pence. Adam Kintzinger and Liz Cheney were the only two Republican who were part of the Jan. 6 Committee which took a deep dive into what really happened that day. They called many witnesses, both Democrats and Republicans, although some people refused to testify (hard-core loyalists of Trump) and did a thorough investigation. It was all televised. As a result of this, Kintzinger and Cheney's political careers ended because they were cast out of the Republican Party. Trump pardoned at least 1500 (or more) J-6 Insurrectionists on his first day in office of his second term by Executive Order. Just wanted to make sure you got the facts correct. Also, Brian Sicknick died (he was a Capitol Policeman) the day after the Insurrection as a direct result of his injuries sustained, and 8 other policemen committed suicide within two weeks of the Insurrection as a direct result of that day. Many others suffered lifelong injuries and are permanently disabled. And now Trump and the Republicans are refusing to put up a plaque that calls the brave police of that day "heroes." Some of the pardoned Insurrectionists are currently back in prison for sex crimes against children and vehicular homicide while driving drunk. I'm sure a lot of the others are now ICE Agents.
Agree on every point in your well-stated comment, but only slightly disagree on Kinzinger..
In two interviews, I heard him describe that he stayed in his office with a loaded gun. So that may not have been “defending the Capitol”, but it was the only form of resistance that a member of Congress demonstrated that I have any knowledge of.
Again, Kudos on a brilliant summary of the insurrection and the House hearings. I watched them and believe they will play an important part in our country’s history
I called my governor yesterday. Reminded her the primary reason governments exist, above all other considerations, is to provide collective security. Tell your state officials that this is a deadly serious moment that requires deadly serious decisions, and the time of fucking around is long past.
Outstanding structural analysis. The progression from Pierson → Harlow → Ziglar shows how judicial decisions gradually built an architecture of impunity - not one dramatic change, just incremental degradation until accountability mechanisms effectively disappear.
Your state prosecution angle highlights something crucial: federalism creates redundancy. When federal accountability fails, state authority provides a backup mechanism. This is actually how distributed power is SUPPOSED to work.
The challenge, of course, is that only some states will exercise this authority. But that’s still structurally significant - partial resistance is better than no resistance.
While reading this, I realized this might be one of the major structural differences between our situation and, say, Weimar Germany: we have 50 semi-sovereign jurisdictions with actual enforcement power. Not all will resist federal overreach, but some will. That creates friction, litigation, public documentation of what’s happening. It’s not perfect protection, but it’s real.
Your tactical proposals matter immediately. State prosecution creates accountability when federal systems refuse to. That’s not just necessary - it’s how the architecture is designed to function when one level fails.
Watching the video of Renee Good’s shooting, I was struck that this event is indistinguishable from a carjacking gone wrong. Masked thugs with guns yell and swear, rushing her vehicle, try to pull her out, shoot her as she leaves, then jump into their own vehicle and flee the scene. Prosecute these criminals.
I hear the clarity in what Chris is saying, and I don’t think it comes from fantasy or thrill. It comes from watching the rule of law hollow out while people keep insisting that patience is a virtue even when patience is being used against us. He’s naming something real: an enforcement apparatus that increasingly operates without visibility, without accountability, and without fear of consequence. History doesn’t treat that pattern gently.
He’s also right about this much: incrementalism has failed. Quiet memos, task forces, commissions, and politely worded condemnations don’t restrain power that has already decided it can act without cost. When agents conceal their identities, refuse to identify authority, and use lethal force against civilians, something foundational has already broken. Calling that out plainly matters.
But clarity cuts both ways.
Authoritarian systems don’t collapse when confronted. They consolidate. They wait for the moment when resistance crosses a line that can be reframed as disorder. They don’t need a mass uprising. They need a single incident that can be looped on cable news, cited in emergency orders, and used to justify escalation. One dead officer. A handful of wounded. One chaotic confrontation caught on a shaky phone camera. That’s all it takes.
From that moment on, restraint is no longer on the table. Federalization follows. Militarization follows. Governors lose discretion. Courts defer. The language shifts from enforcement to security, from rights to stabilization. The very acts meant to restore the rule of law become the pretext for suspending it entirely.
That’s not speculation. It’s how every modern authoritarian transition accelerates.
So the question isn’t whether Chris is right about the danger. He is. The question is whether the form of resistance we choose denies power its preferred outcome or hands it over wrapped in justification.
States absolutely have authority to prosecute crimes committed within their borders. That power shouldn’t be surrendered. But how it’s exercised matters as much as whether it’s exercised. Quiet, methodical prosecution backed by airtight evidence, civilian witnesses, bodycam footage, and public transparency weakens impunity over time. It builds records that survive hostile courts. It denies the federal government the spectacle it wants.
Open confrontation in the street does the opposite. It invites force. It shortens the fuse. It collapses moral asymmetry into visual chaos. And once bullets start flying between uniforms, the public conversation is over. At that point, it doesn’t matter who was right first. What matters is who controls the response.
This administration is not afraid of conflict. It is organized around it. It wants resistance to look like disorder so it can present itself as the only remaining source of order. Violent civil reciprocity is not a risk here. It’s the strategy being baited.
None of this means standing down. It means resisting in ways that are harder to criminalize, harder to caricature, and harder to crush. Lawfare instead of street confrontation. Documentation instead of spectacle. Relentless exposure instead of reactive escalation. State power used surgically, not theatrically.
The most dangerous mistake right now would be confusing urgency with speed. Authoritarianism doesn’t fear urgency. It fears legitimacy slipping quietly out of reach.
If resistance triggers militarization, the next phase won’t be about immigration enforcement or public safety. It will be about internal security. And once that threshold is crossed, the space for lawful resistance shrinks to almost nothing.
We need to be clear-eyed enough to see that trap before stepping into it.
The fight isn’t whether the law still exists. It’s whether we let power decide when and how force becomes the answer. If we hand them that moment, they will not give it back.
Resistance must continue. But it must deny the regime the escalation it’s waiting for, not deliver it on schedule.
Dino, this is exactly the kind of strategic thinking the moment requires. You’re right that authoritarian systems don’t just tolerate confrontation - they weaponize it. The escalation trap is real.
And yet Armitage is also right: quiet patience while agents operate with complete impunity isn’t sustainable either. That’s acquiescence with better optics.
This feels like our bailing water versus patching holes conversation again. Methodical state prosecution is necessary NOW (bailing water). Structural reform that creates durable accountability is necessary LATER (patching holes). Neither tactic alone fixes the underlying architecture.
What bothers me is we’re debating tactics because we lack the architecture that would make either approach work reliably. Functional accountability would mean: independent oversight with enforcement authority, clear consequences for exceeding lawful authority, professional standards enforceable regardless of political will. The kind of institutional design that makes refusing unlawful orders professionally safer than complying with them.
We don’t have that. And neither tactical patience nor tactical confrontation builds it.
Your point about denying them the escalation they want is well taken. But we also can’t let ‘avoiding their trap’ become learned helplessness where we’re so afraid of playing into their hands that we never actually impose consequences.
States using their authority carefully and methodically (as you describe) keeps us alive long enough to build the structural reforms that create accountability regardless of who’s in power. We need both.
Thank you, Jason! Good to read it explicitly: both reactions are important, and seriously needed.
I like the way you think. Thanks again.
Excellent! It's why I try to do more direct actions. I still do peace marches at times (MLK Day). I noted years ago that the system just ignores us. The MSM may report, but it features the violence to shift blame or responsibility away from this unjust system. Thank you. ✌️
Now that 60 Minutes has been neutered, Christopher Armitage is becoming a superior voice in critical investigative journalism, at least to me. With this report on the track record of an agency that has become a lethal goon squad, I now know why ICE agents are so violently inclined. And to be under the direction of a racist, violent man adds to our despair. However, I see state prosecutions being applied in states that reject Trump's authority. So much of this feels like the winds of a civil war. It is not what we want, but it may be inevitable if the murders of our peaceful citizens continue. It is not the time to be on the sidelines; citizens must be engaged and defend our democracy or else.
Agreed.
It is horrifying to have it spelled out so clearly just how disgusting ICE was even BEFORE this administration!! Back then, ICE actually had SOME basic requirements and standards for hiring!! Now they actually seek out the worst of the worst bottom feeders!! Every state MUST step up and fight back!!
Absolutely agree with all three of Chris’ points in the column. From what little I’ve seen about Agent Ross, he appears to be a Minnesota resident (at least that’s what I read). Given that we have prima facie evidence that he was the shooter—and that he’s clearly a significant flight risk—why hasn’t Minnesota taken him into custody already?
I’m not a lawyer, but under the circumstances, I’ve got to believe that a court would have little trouble agreeing that he should remain incarcerated until the investigation is complete and a decision on indicting him on state charges is made. That might even help get the FBI to share whatever findings it reaches in whatever investigation it actually conducts. I would also think this would send a message to the remaining ICE agents that the regime’s pronouncements notwithstanding, there are consequences for egregious actions. Furthermore, if the regime abandons him, it would send an even more powerful message to the ICE rank and file that the regime isn’t serious about protecting them.
The Minneapolis Chief of Police (I believe that's who it was) was interviewed shortly after the shooting and gave incredibly mealy-mouthed answers. Why wasn't the shooter arrested? He talked about federal jurisdiction and immunity and the wonderful cooperation between federal and local law enforcement. All B.S.! Now the shooter is in protective custody (hiding) and they'll just wait until it blows over and forget the whole thing. There will be some fresh outrage that makes everyone stop talking about it. Kinda like the Epstein files.
“The conflict has to happen.”
Indeed.
Thank you, Christopher, for this thoroughly researched piece. Please send this to blue-state officials, in particular to Minnesota officials who seem to be “pearl-clutchers.“
Ron, you can support by buying copies of Chris' booklet, printing out this column, and mailing a copy to your Blue pols, or a Blue state of your choice. Government, AG, etc.
Heck yes, Debbie!
Thanks for letting Ron know 🌲🌲🌲
Yes, I have done so – to Newsom and AG Bonta. I just thought Christopher might have more sway.
Yes, maybe, but YOU are apparently a voter in CA. How much more sway can you have?? Interacting here to know more profoundly in your heart that you are creating a chance to stand up for what's right.
Maybe Chris will address the issue, maybe calling on Mark Kelley and Elissa Slotkin and the others who made the video to tell the military not to obey illegal orders, how they can know when to draw the line...
Christopher, you spell things out so clearly and accurately. I just want to thank you for your heroic efforts in keeping us informed, engaged, and sane.
Appreciate it, Alison.
Thanks for reading and wanting the world to be a better place 🌲 🌲🌲
Chris's ideas are what need to happen. My concern is state officials as well as city and state law enforcement do not have the political WILL to implement this state level of enforcement. Because the underlying word here is ENFORCEMENT. How on earth do we enforce state judicial authority? Any attempt by state and local officials to enforce our state laws will be resisted by ICE itself and the federal regime that has enabled and protected them. We can already see what happened in MN - they attempted to start and investigation into the Renee Good murder and got immediately shut down by the FBI and the regime. Are state officials continuing to pursue the investigation? Can they? I mean, these ideas seem like our only hope but they also seem so far from actually getting implemented for many reasons. As Chris has advocated, putting massive public pressure on our state officials should goad them into taking action, but so far, nothing of the sort is happening anywhere - CA, OR, WA, IL, MA, NY, etc. Or am I missing something?
Just yesterday I sent five letters pleading for them to start taking action - to my 3 MOCs, the AG, and the Governor. This is the second time I've done this and I've been encouraging my family and friends to do it. Alas, few have, if any... to my knowledge. What is it about concerned people that they can't do the small task of sending emails or calling? Are they afraid? So many people I know seem almost numbed into inaction.
Our AG in WA state has filed lawsuits against this regime. Bob Ferguson is our former AG. Some judges are still ruling against these criminal enablers. We shall see if some action is taken to protect us in this case.
In addition, my perception over time is that large numbers of "elected" officials at city and state levels are also corrupt.
Thanks for that - we can be extremely pleased with Nick Brown and Bob Ferguson. And yes, plenty of elected officials are sympathetic to the regime’s goals.
Are you aware that a court has ruled against Bob Ferguson on the plane ride ethics thing? I don't have it handy. Seattle Times yesterday or Friday.
Most welcome. ✌️
Thank you, Christopher for this erudite report. We are under siege, and you have provided a clarion look into the structure of this dystopia.
Yup. A disruptive approach must be applied broadly to oppose the aggressively fascist actions being taken by the GOP and Trump administration. Otherwise they will continue to run roughshod over the People under the thin veils of “immigration enforcement” or “national security.”
Extrajudicial killings equal murder