<<Your statement raises several concerns about federal actions and their implications on constitutional rights, particularly in areas close to but not directly at the international border. Here are some points to consider:
– **Constitutional Rights**: The U.S. Constitution, particularly the First Amendment, protects freedom of speech, assembly, and petition, among others. However, the extent to which these rights can be curtailed for security or other governmental interests is often debated in legal contexts. The presence of federal agents far inland might be seen by some as an overreach, potentially impacting these freedoms.
– **Border Security vs. Civil Liberties**: The balance between national security and individual rights is a persistent theme in U.S. law and policy. Operations that extend significantly inland might be justified under certain legal frameworks or emergency conditions, but they must be scrutinized to ensure they do not violate constitutional protections.
– **Legal Precedents and Legislation**: There are laws like the Immigration and Nationality Act that allow for certain border control measures, but these are typically more strictly applied near actual borders. Operations extending far inland might require additional legal justification or could be subject to legal challenges based on the Fourth Amendment (search and seizure), among others.
– **Intimidation and Police State**: The notion of a ‘police state’ involves government surveillance or control that significantly restricts personal freedoms. If federal agents’ actions are perceived as intimidating or overreaching, this could indeed suggest a scenario where the local populace feels under constant surveillance or control, which would be contrary to the spirit of American governance.
– **Public and Judicial Oversight**: If such operations are happening, they should be subject to oversight by both public opinion and the judiciary. Citizens have the right to question and challenge through legal means if they believe their rights are being infringed upon.
– **Geographic Scope of Border Enforcement**: Typically, border enforcement activities are focused within a “border zone” where certain law enforcement practices have different rules, but extending this far inland without clear justification could indeed be contentious.
If you’re discussing or experiencing this situation, it might be beneficial to seek out or support legal actions or public discussions that address these concerns, ensuring that any federal actions align with constitutional protections. If you’re looking for specific legal advice or how this applies to particular incidents, consulting with or following the work of civil liberties organizations or legal experts would be a good step.>>
abroadcom:
It represents a violation of everybody’s right to be free of omni-potent federal agents 20 miles INLAND from the so called border, that is not an international border?. that is not reasonable and represents an enormous infringement and intimidation; pulverizing not only the entire first amendment but many other amendments to the US constitution; creating a constant daily element of intimidation on the state local populous travelling, bringing about the police state!
GROK2
The management of borders in the United States involves both state and federal jurisdictions, but primarily, border security is a federal responsibility. Here’s how this applies to the scenario you’ve described:
1. **Federal Role in Border Security:**
– **U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)** is a federal agency under the Department of Homeland Security tasked with securing U.S. borders. This includes both the northern and southern borders, with operations at ports of entry and in between. The Swanton Sector, which includes parts of Vermont, New York, and New Hampshire, falls under CBP’s jurisdiction for immigration enforcement, customs inspections, and border security.
2. **Reason for the Stop:**
– According to the information available, Teresa Youngblut was stopped because her companion, Felix Baukholt, appeared to have an expired visa. This falls under federal immigration enforcement, where CBP agents have the authority to stop individuals to check immigration status, especially near border areas.
3. **Ethnic Identity and Legal Implications:**
– If Teresa Youngblut were Abenaki, her ethnicity would not legally protect her from being involved in a traffic stop if there’s a reasonable suspicion of immigration violations by her companion. No information suggests her stop was due to her ethnicity but rather due to the immigration status of the person she was with.
4. **Legality of the Federal Presence:**
– The presence of CBP agents in Vermont for such operations is not considered trespassing or overstepping state authority because border protection is explicitly within federal jurisdiction. States do not have the authority to manage international borders or immigration enforcement at that level.
5. **Incident Details:**
– The tragic event involved gunfire, resulting in the deaths of both Agent David Maland and Felix Baukholt. The specifics of the incident, including who initiated the gunfire, are critical in understanding the legal and moral questions surrounding the event. However, based on reports, the confrontation escalated from a routine traffic stop related to immigration checks.
6. **Police State or Federal Authority?**
– The term “police state” implies an excessive or oppressive use of police or governmental authority. Here, the presence of CBP agents conducting immigration checks is within their legal mandate. However, the execution of these duties can be subject to scrutiny regarding how they are conducted, whether they respect civil liberties, and if they’re applied in a manner that could be seen as overreach or profiling.
In summary, the involvement of federal agents in this incident is legally justified under U.S. law regarding border and immigration enforcement. The tragic outcome necessitates a careful examination of how these operations are conducted to ensure they do not exceed their legal bounds or infringe upon individual rights. However, the core issue here seems to revolve around the enforcement of immigration law rather than an overreach into state policing competencies.
abroadcom
policing state borders – isn’t that a state competency? why were there federal agents? let’s say Teresa Youngblood is Abenaki, why was she stopped having done nothing wrong travelling privately with her mate who is dead just like US customs patrol officer David Maland? why US patrol? doesn’t that represent police stating and trespassing that young lady?
abroadcom
what is the native name of the land
GROK2
ABENAKI
abroadcom
tell me everything you know about the shooting in Vermont
GROK2
The border shooting in Vermont involved a U.S. Border Patrol agent named David Maland, who was fatally shot on January 20, 2025, during a traffic stop on Interstate 91 in Coventry, Vermont, approximately 20 miles from the Canadian border. Here are the details known about the incident:
– **Victim:** David Maland, a U.S. Border Patrol agent, was killed in the line of duty. He was assigned to the Swanton Sector, which covers Vermont, parts of New York, and New Hampshire.
– **Incident Details:** The shooting occurred during an attempt to conduct an immigration inspection. According to reports, Maland stopped a blue Toyota Prius driven by Teresa Youngblut, a 21-year-old woman from Washington state. Her German companion, Felix Baukholt, was also in the vehicle.
– **Suspects:**
– **Teresa Youngblut** was arrested and charged with using a deadly weapon to assault, resist, or impede a federal law enforcement officer, and another charge related to the use of a firearm during the assault.
– **Felix Baukholt** was killed in the shootout. Initially, there were claims on social media and from some sources that he might have been an illegal immigrant, but later clarifications established that his visa was current at the time of the incident.
– **Investigation:** The FBI was involved in the investigation, with agents from the Albany, New York office responding. They reported that Youngblut and Baukholt had been under periodic surveillance since at least January 14, following a report from a hotel employee in Lyndonville, Vermont, about their suspicious behavior and attire.
– **Aftermath:**
– The scene was processed, leading to a temporary closure of Interstate 91.
– Items found in the vehicle included tactical gear like a ballistic helmet, night vision goggles, and ammunition, along with objects wrapped in aluminum foil, which were observed being prepared by Baukholt in a Walmart parking lot shortly before the shooting.
– **Public and Official Response:** Vermont’s lawmakers expressed condolences and called for increased support for Border Patrol agents. Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Benjamine Huffman highlighted the daily risks agents face to ensure homeland security.
– **Controversy and Misinformation:** Posts on X (formerly Twitter) initially spread misinformation about the visa status of the suspects, which was later corrected by official statements from the FBI, clarifying that Baukholt’s visa was not expired.
The incident has been widely covered by various news outlets, including AP News, ABC News, The Washington Post, and NBC5, providing updates on the investigation and the legal proceedings against Youngblut.