Things That Matter

How The FBI-Apple Battle Could Affect Millions of Latinos

Apple and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) are currently entrenched in a legal battle over encryption. Believe it or not, the outcome of that fight could affect the Latino community. Here’s why:

Wait, what are they fighting about?

Credit: “Last Week Tonight”/ HBO/ YouTube

The best explanation on why Apple and the FBI are fighting in court was given by John Oliver last week. If you don’t have 18 minutes to spare, here’s the basic gist: The FBI is currently in possession of an iPhone that belonged to Syed Rizwan Farook, one of the two San Bernardino shooters. Unfortunately for the FBI, the iPhone is passcode-protected, and the government agency can’t break into it because of the privacy protections Apple has put in place. As a result, the FBI has asked Apple to update its software so that it can traverse those protections. Apple has said no.

Why Should I Care?

giphy-5
Credit: BoingBoing/ Giphy

Because if Apple gives the FBI what they want, it’ll be a slippery slope. The FBI is trying to paint this as a “one time only” kind of thing. Apple says that if they give in, they’ll be opening a Pandora’s box where law enforcement officials can come to them at any point and ask them to do the same thing. This isn’t an unfounded fear. A recent court filing showed that Apple already has 12 requests asking for the same thing. Think of it this way: you know that really anxious and uncomfortable feeling you get when someone borrows your phone for like even a second? Well imagine that instead of it being your friend, it’s the cops. If that doesn’t freak you out, you’re just straight up lying.

Does this really matter?

Credit: @wombel/Twitter

At the end of the day, it boils down to the right to privacy, which is guaranteed to U.S. citizens by the Fourth Amendment. The counterargument to this is that if you have nothing to hide, then you should have nothing to be worried about. With all due respect, that’s straight up dumb. I’m gonna let my homeboy Edward Snowden, who’s on Apple’s side, take this one.

Ok, that’s all fine and good, but how does it affect Latinos?

applefbi
Credit: Univision Noticias/YouTube

I’m getting there, gosh! Okay, so remember how I said that law enforcement agencies could and would ask Apple to unlock other iPhones for them? Well, one of those agencies could be Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) or the Border Patrol. In fact, this is the argument that Eddy Cue, Apple’s highest ranking Latino executive, made to Univision recently. Obviously, Cue is representing Apple’s interest, but in this case they also happen to be our interests. And yes, this might sound like a too far-fetched scenario, but then again, law enforcement officials have already begun using social media to target immigrants.

WATCH: Body Cam Footage Shows Man Pleading With Police that He Can’t Breathe Moments Before He Dies

Do you value your constitutionally-protected right privacy? If so click the share button below!

Supreme Court Blocks Trump Administration From Eliminating DACA

Things That Matter

Supreme Court Blocks Trump Administration From Eliminating DACA

Ethan Miller / Getty Images

For three years, people with Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) status faced an uncertain future. The Trump administration was involved in legal battles after abruptly eliminating the program. For the third time this week, the Supreme Court has handed down a major loss for the Trump administration as they protected DACA from Trump’s attack.

The Supreme Court ruled that the Trump administration cannot end DACA.

The 5-4 decision is the third major legal loss for the Trump administration this week. SCOTUS ruled earlier this week that LGBTQ+ cannot be fired for their sexual orientation or gender identity. The court also refused to take up a case challenging California’s sanctuary state law letting the law stand.

The decision to temporarily protect DACA was a split decision with all of the conservative justices (Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch, and Samuel A. Alito Jr.) voting in favor of the Trump administration. Justice John Robert joined the liberal justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, Stephen Breyer, and Elena Kagan saving the program from the Trump administration, for now.

In the ruling, written by Justice John Roberts, the court cites that the acting secretary of state violated the Administrative Procedures Act when ending the program. Basically, the announcement was lacking substance and did not address key parts of the policy. This made the announcement void of an argument supporting the dismantling of the program.

The ruling is only temporary relief for the hundreds of thousands of young people on DACA.

While the program has been spared, it is not completely saved. The decision from the Supreme Court today focuses on the way DACA was eliminated, not the actual elimination. This means that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) now has time to reevaluate its case against DACA to try again.

“The Court still does not resolve the question of DACA’s rescission,” Alito wrote in his dissent. “Instead, it tells the Department of Homeland Security to go back and try again.”

The conservative justices, while dissenting, did release statements that agreed with parts of the decision to block the Trump administration from eliminating DACA. The Trump administration first announced that they were ending DACA in 2017 with a press conference on the border led by Jeff Sessions.

Justice Sotomayor made her own headlines after calling the case a racist attack.

“I would not so readily dismiss the allegation that an executive decision disproportionately harms the same racial group that the President branded as less desirable mere months earlier,” Justice Sotomayor wrote in her concurrence of the decision.

Organizers and activists are giving credit to the DACA community for this victory.

The DACA community has led the charge to protect their status in the U.S. The movement has largely been done thanks to the work of DACA recipients fighting for their right to be here. For many, it is the only country they know after arriving to the U.S. without proper documentation when they were young children.

The president has tweeted his clear displeasure on the Supreme Court that he tried to stack in his favor by appointing two justices.

Both justice Kavanaugh and Gorsuch were Trump’s appointees. After three losses from the Supreme Court, President Trump followed his usual playbook and accused the Supreme Court of not liking him.

Now, it is time for Congress to act.

With DACA recipients temporarily spared sudden deportation, Congress must act and pass legislation protecting Dreamers from being deported. The Dream Act is one piece of legislation that offers DACA recipients a pathway to citizenship, something most Americans agree with.

READ: ICE Is Threatening To Reopen Deportation Proceedings Against All DACA Recipients Regardless Of DACA Status

Supreme Court Refuses Case Challenging California’s Sanctuary State Status

Things That Matter

Supreme Court Refuses Case Challenging California’s Sanctuary State Status

Alex Wong / Getty Images

The Supreme Court of the United States has refused to hear a challenge to California’s sanctuary state law. At the heart of the case is the state’s law limiting the cooperation of state law enforcement with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

The Supreme Court refused to hear a challenge to California’s sanctuary state law in a 7-2 vote.

Conservative justice Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. both wanted to hear the case brought by the Trump administration. The other justices, John Roberts, Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch, Sonia Sotomayor, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan, and Stephen Breyer voted against the Trump administration refusing to hear the case.

The court, as per usual custom, did not offer a reason as to why they will not hear the case. This means that the previous ruling the case will stand.

The previous court ruling, supporting the law, will now stand in California.

A unanimous panel of judges in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled in favor of the law. According to the lower court’s ruling, the federal government has no power in commandeering a state’s cooperation with federal immigration authorities. The ruling states that California’s law can stand because of the Tenth Amendment.

This is a significant blow to the Trump administration that has made a toughness on immigration central to their mission. President Donald Trump, who lost in the Supreme Court twice today, started his 2016 campaign railing against Mexican immigrants calling them rapists and criminals.

The decision is making some people question the humanity of Thomas and Alito.

Justices Thomas and Alito are notorious for being very conservative justices. The two justices usually vote along party lines siding with the Conservative population. Their rulings are often targeted at limiting rights to certain groups. Justice Thomas makes news when he asks questions from the bench because of his consistent silence.

The ruling has sent critics of the president into a laugh-filled celebration.

It wasn’t long ago that news agencies reported that Trump went to the bunker during the Black Lives Matter protests in Washington. Trump claims that he went to the bunker to inspect it, not to hide from protesters. The news sent protesters and BLM supports to call out the president unable to handle a protest against him.

Some people think it has been a very bad day for the U.S. president.

A Supreme Court decision is precedent. Now, the California law limiting cooperation between state law enforcement and ICE can be replicated in other states. It is also another example of a state’s rights being protected.

READ: Supreme Court Hearing Arguments For DACA, Leaning Towards Elimination