It is completely unsurprising that this is happening.
It will be completely unsurprising that despite a "strongly worded letter" it will continue to happen and there will be no consequences despite the unconstitutionality.
The US Government and the very idea of a rule of law here are hopelessly broken and there is no obvious peaceful path to ever fixing it.
The problem is that either a majority, or a large enough minority that due to how the U.S. constitution distributes power, of voters are absolutely fine with this.
too many Americans just don't vote or pay attention to politics at all
the 3 branch system of government used in the US never foresaw or planned for a situation in which two of the branches would just simply abdicate their own power
From a tech perspective, I do find myself occasionally having interesting discussions with co-founders about what it means to be operating our business in a legal environment where the rule of law is diminished. Startups have often had to contend with variance in enforcement and interpretation.
Some of my favorite historical examples of startups who had to worry about uncertain rule of law are:
- Aereo[0]: Who tried their very best to follow the law diligently but got slapped down anyways.
- Uber[1]: Who blatantly broke the law so callously that they relied on gaps in the rule of law to enable their business model.
- Kim Dotcom[2]: A German-born citizen who had never set foot inside USA's jurisdiction found himself arrested by the FBI in helicopters storming his home in New Zealand. This emphasized that any founder needs to follow US law, no matter where they are operating.
In each case, it seemed that whoever had more money tended to win, rather than who had the letter of the law on their side.
I agree with your overall point, but for Kim's case, it seems it was actually NZ police who arrested him, no? NZ just decided to enforce US law because of mutual treaties.
Ah, you’re right. The reporting[0] at the time seemed to imply that a handful of FBI agents were present among the NZ officers during what was reported to be a "US-led raid". FBI agents evidently[1] left the country with physical evidence from the raid that NZ was supposed to keep custody of.
To clarify, Kim Dotcom was arrested by NZ police and is making his way through the NZ court system. It wasn't a Maduro situation. I'm not sure he's even been extradited yet (though that's the most likely outcome).
20+ years ago it was torture memo. Similar principle of responsibility laundering - some government lawyer writes a memo that it is ok do to that thing (even when it is an obviously illegal thing), and the government agents go full speed ahead, and nobody held responsible after that.
It is completely unsurprising that this is happening.
It will be completely unsurprising that despite a "strongly worded letter" it will continue to happen and there will be no consequences despite the unconstitutionality.
The US Government and the very idea of a rule of law here are hopelessly broken and there is no obvious peaceful path to ever fixing it.
The problem is that either a majority, or a large enough minority that due to how the U.S. constitution distributes power, of voters are absolutely fine with this.
That is one of the major problems, yes.
Other problems include:
too many Americans just don't vote or pay attention to politics at all
the 3 branch system of government used in the US never foresaw or planned for a situation in which two of the branches would just simply abdicate their own power
From a tech perspective, I do find myself occasionally having interesting discussions with co-founders about what it means to be operating our business in a legal environment where the rule of law is diminished. Startups have often had to contend with variance in enforcement and interpretation.
Some of my favorite historical examples of startups who had to worry about uncertain rule of law are:
- Aereo[0]: Who tried their very best to follow the law diligently but got slapped down anyways.
- Uber[1]: Who blatantly broke the law so callously that they relied on gaps in the rule of law to enable their business model.
- Kim Dotcom[2]: A German-born citizen who had never set foot inside USA's jurisdiction found himself arrested by the FBI in helicopters storming his home in New Zealand. This emphasized that any founder needs to follow US law, no matter where they are operating.
In each case, it seemed that whoever had more money tended to win, rather than who had the letter of the law on their side.
0: https://archive.md/PJHhD
1: https://archive.md/tqk3W
2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Dotcom
I agree with your overall point, but for Kim's case, it seems it was actually NZ police who arrested him, no? NZ just decided to enforce US law because of mutual treaties.
Ah, you’re right. The reporting[0] at the time seemed to imply that a handful of FBI agents were present among the NZ officers during what was reported to be a "US-led raid". FBI agents evidently[1] left the country with physical evidence from the raid that NZ was supposed to keep custody of.
0: https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/96384/fbi-agents-continu...
1: https://www.odt.co.nz/news/national/fbi-committed-illegal-ac...
To clarify, Kim Dotcom was arrested by NZ police and is making his way through the NZ court system. It wasn't a Maduro situation. I'm not sure he's even been extradited yet (though that's the most likely outcome).
20+ years ago it was torture memo. Similar principle of responsibility laundering - some government lawyer writes a memo that it is ok do to that thing (even when it is an obviously illegal thing), and the government agents go full speed ahead, and nobody held responsible after that.
It wasnt just some rando totally unknown gov lawyer
He was south Korean and proud to sign it for bush and said so in multiple interviews he would do it all over again
John yoo
Yep, the "Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law at the University of California, Berkeley." (perhaps ironically given the reputation of Berkeley).
>proud to sign it for bush and said so in multiple interviews he would do it all over again
why not if you can't be held responsible.
Morals, ethics, empathy, humanity, …
well, we see time and time again what's left of "Morals, ethics, empathy, humanity, …" once the threat of consequences is removed.
What/who is bluementhals?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Blumenthal
The letter linked by this post is signed by the U.S. Senator.
> Richard Blumenthal
> Ranking Member
> Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
This is 2026 in a nutshell
"Uggh chat gpt can you get these illegal kkk badge wearing nazis out of my house wtf man "
Myself assumes they're point is that their should be some apostrophe's.
Earlier: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46712279