this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2026
245 points (100.0% liked)

politics

27493 readers
2896 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 61 points 1 day ago (3 children)

This union doesn’t “oversee” border patrol.

The murdered nurse was a member of AFGE, and the AFGE is affiliated with the National Border Patrol Council (NBPC). But that doesn’t mean the AFGE fully represents the NBPC. It’s a team-up to have more collective bargaining power.

If the NBPC says that their leaders should be fired, THEN shit will have really hit the fan.

[–] arrow74@lemmy.zip 12 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Plus due to laws that restrict federal workers right to strike, federal employee unions are incredibly weak

[–] JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca 13 points 1 day ago

Thanks Ronnie you fuckin mushbrain bigot

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Until they strike anyway. That will strengthen their union. What are they going to do, fire EVERY government employee?

[–] arrow74@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago

Last time there was a major walk out they used the military to fill positions until replaced

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works -1 points 22 hours ago

Public sector unions shouldn't exist in the first place.

[–] zloubida@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

It may be cause English is not my mother tongue but isn't it the other way around? That the NBPC is affiliated with AFGE?

(The fact that the NBPC is a member of the AFL-CIO is a shame for all the unions of the AFL-CIO)

[–] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

The The AFGE is larger organization and the NBPC uses their resources and muscle.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If the NBPC says that their leaders should be fired

Why would Donald Trump care? ICE is largely stacked with new recruits entirely loyal to the President. The NBPC isn't representing them in any material capacity.

[–] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 0 points 23 hours ago

Yeah, I don’t know how many of those new folks are or aren’t in that union. All I know is that the veteran border patrol folks are.

And my guess is that a lot of those existing employees are pretty pro Trump. Policing borders isn’t usually the public service job that bleeding heart liberals go for.

[–] whereIsTamara@lemmy.org 21 points 1 day ago (1 children)

A massive union that represents some of … immigration agents

Can we all just take a moment to have a laugh about an immigration agent UNION?

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's an all encompassing union for federal workers that the immigration assholes just happen to be lumped into.

Alex Pretti was in it as well as a VA employee.

[–] whereIsTamara@lemmy.org 3 points 1 day ago

Oh, that makes more sense.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 13 points 1 day ago

Abolish ICE

[–] Pofski@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Honest question.

What happens after they say no?

Because they will refuse. The demanding that they quit doesn't really have any effect does it? Sure it shows that people do not agree with their actions, but still.

As long as they refuse to leave, what is going to change? These people will not have any remorse for what happened. They might just be annoyed that it was clearly in violation of the laws that apply to the plebs, and that they (probably while rolling their eyes) will have to "apologise" for the behaviour of their, clearly overworked, understaffed and misunderstood drones.

But so what?

For them it is probably the same feeling like when the lady at the counter doesn't give back the exact change.

[–] Kirp123@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I guess nothing happens if they say no. They can't even strike, it's illegal for them to do so.

[–] manualoverride@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It’s also illegal to not release the Epstein files, yet here we are.

[–] Kirp123@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Well the difference is that the Executive controls the enforcement of laws so they can just be selective with the enforcement. They won't enforce the law when it comes to the Epstein files but they definitely will if the union get uppity and strikes.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 1 points 1 day ago

They Quiet Quit, employ Malicious Compliance, etc. Report EVERY problem, no matter how small. Once the government has a report, it must follow it through. Flood the government with requests to fix dripping sinks, loose hinges, etc. Tie MAGA up in layers of bureaucratic bullshit for even the easiest stuff.