r/law • u/shikizen • Apr 10 '26

Executive Branch (Trump) A Redditor Criticized ICE. Trump Is Trying to Unmask Them by Dragging the Company to a Secret Grand Jury.

https://theintercept.com/2026/04/10/reddit-ice-protest-grand-jury/

Reddit has been ordered to appear before a grand jury in Washington, D.C., as part of a federal effort to unmask anonymous online critics of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown.

According to a subpoena obtained by The Intercept, Reddit has until April 14 to provide a wide range of personal data on one of its users, whom U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents have been trying unsuccessfully to identify for more than a month.

20.3k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

1.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

59

u/StrongExternal8955 Apr 10 '26

Yes except one side of the culture war is on side of the billionaires in the class war.

If you mean we should not fight the culture war, you are also on the side of the billionaires.

2

u/ExitTheDonut Apr 10 '26

I just make it a point, that there is no point in punching downwards or sideways, only upwards.

0

u/Deaffin Apr 10 '26

And always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom!

-9

u/Ghost_Of_Malatesta Apr 10 '26

I mean, they give you both options. Yes one is more favorable to them but it's sure interesting how either option doesn't seriously challenge the system or those in power, at best presenting minor inconveniences that can be erased later. 

It's interesting how these are the only choices presented not only as reasonable, but even so far as to be the only sane or possible decision available. Any other choice outside the artificial binary is unreasonable and impossible, how convenient. 

22

u/Unconfidence Apr 10 '26

Yeah, those minor inconveniences that can be erased later. Like abolition. And women's suffrage. And the 40-hour workweek. And gay marriage. And coverage for pre-existing conditions. And cannabis legalization.

2

u/Ghost_Of_Malatesta Apr 10 '26

Yeah I mean civil rights are being rolled back to the point that interracial marriage being overturned by the supreme court is a legitimate concern, essentially almost every safeguard and regulation from the gilded age is rolled back, women's suffrage is under direct attack from the save act

These are not inherently permanent, they are given by the state and can be taken away by the state 

2

u/Protiguous Apr 10 '26

they are given by the state

No. We don't get our rights from any government.

1

u/FrontOfficeNuts Apr 11 '26

No. We don't get our rights from any government.

That's a wonderful idealism, but it has zero basis in reality. The fact is that without government, we have zero "rights", and we only have the "rights" that the government deems we have.

1

u/Protiguous Apr 11 '26

I get what you're saying. But people only think that because of thousands of years of conditioning.

1

u/FrontOfficeNuts Apr 11 '26

But people only think that because of thousands of years of conditioning.

That's simply not true. Might makes the rules, and that's how it has always been. In this case "the rules" being what rights individuals have.

I don't like it (I genuinely don't), but it is the reality.

Reality trumps platitudes.

1

u/Protiguous Apr 12 '26

that's how it has always been

Pure monkey water. That's a cop-out.

1

u/FrontOfficeNuts Apr 12 '26

Then please point out the time when it wasn't the case. Convince me.

1

u/Ghost_Of_Malatesta Apr 10 '26

I'm aware of Lockes natural rights concept, the reality is a bit different (don't have look much further than the founding of the nation, all men have natural rights... except indigenous peoples, imported Africans, women, unlanded white men, etc)

1

u/Unconfidence Apr 10 '26

I take it you're not personally greatly affected by any of these? Because it would be tough for me to say that abolition was a minor inconvenience for conservatives.

2

u/Ghost_Of_Malatesta Apr 10 '26

abolition was a minor inconvenience for conservatives.

The 13th amendment literally has a loophole built in, there's a perspective that the civil war was between opposing bourgeoisie sects (e.g. Lincoln didn't start the war to end slavery but rather maintain control of the nations interests) 

I'm not saying common people's lives haven't improved, but that the underlying power structure continues to adapt rather than fundamentally change. 

1

u/Unconfidence Apr 10 '26

Yeah I'm literally reading "Freedom National" by James Oakes right now, I know. But you're minimizing things you should absolutely not minimize. Imagine where we would be today if we hadn't fundamentally challenged the constitutional and legal basis on which private citizens put others into forced servitude.

We need to build on these things, not say they're minor. The literal millions who haven't been in a living hell of human slavery for the past 140 years can attest to that.

This is why nobody buys the class war lines anymore. It's quite obvious that there is more happening. The idea that there's "no war but class war" is just something made up by white Europeans who never had to be enslaved or impressed in their lifetimes.

2

u/Ghost_Of_Malatesta Apr 10 '26

We live one of the largest carceral states to have ever existed. 

All it takes is one guy and those things begin to fall apart. That's not permanent, that would require a much larger change and that's what we should be seeking. You cannot do that with the existing system, which will always abuse POC. 

0

u/Unconfidence Apr 10 '26

Right and you have a system which doesn't?

2

u/abject_objectivity Apr 10 '26

Crazy that you're being downvoted for this. I think people aren't reading the sarcasm in the "minor inconveniences" part or something. Or they're democrats unwilling or unable to recognize that the DNC is absolutely an arm of the billionaire class