July 26, 2020
On Thursday, the New York Times published a bombshell story: The Department of Homeland Security threatened two filmmakers with lawsuits in a blatantly unconstitutional attempt at extra-judicial prior restraint.
It had to be outside the court system. The DHS wanted to muzzle the film, "Immigration Nation," until after the 2020 election.
The last president to try a stunt like that was Richard Nixon, and the government's bid to keep the "Pentagon Papers" out of The Washington Post failed. Besides, the legal effort to block Too Much and Never Enough by Mary Trump, had been a bust.
The last president to try a stunt like that was Richard Nixon, and the government's bid to keep the "Pentagon Papers" out of The Washington Post failed. Besides, the legal effort to block Too Much and Never Enough by Mary Trump, had been a bust.
 |
Bambi: Sweet, innocent, and utterly unlike what ICE saw when it reviewed the preliminary cut. |
The DHS walked itself into today's situation in 2017 by granting the filmmakers, Shaul Schwartz and Christina Clusiau, exceptional access to the workings of Immigration and Customs Enforcement for a documentary that will be released on Netflix on August 3.
The couple's prior works included "Trophy," a prizewinning documentary that did not glorify big-game hunting, and, for Schwartz, "Narco Cultura," a complex look at drug culture. (Both are available on Amazon Prime.)
Maybe DHS officials thought "Trophy" was an inoffensive Public Broadcasting-style critterfest. Maybe they thought that ICE would be Disneyfied.
Maybe DHS officials thought "Trophy" was an inoffensive Public Broadcasting-style critterfest. Maybe they thought that ICE would be Disneyfied.
Over 2-1/2 years, the filmmakers wound up with scenes showing ICE agents lying to and mocking immigrants, thrilling at an OK to arrest additional immigrants, and even picking a lock on an apartment building. They also showed ICE agents saving the lives of dehydrated immigrants trying to cross the desert on foot.
The couple were allowed to talk to immigrants and staff members, a rare form of access, and the film tells the stories of several, including one grandmother who had refused to give up her 12-year-old granddaughter to a local MS-13 gang for what the Times calls "a forced marriage." The grandmother requested asylum because of death threats. (MS-13 is a loose association of individual gangs with many branches in the United States.)
When Schwartz and Clusiau sent the six-part draft to ICE officials, as they had agreed to do, the official who had worked with them hit the ceiling and, one presumes, left a dent. ICE officials threatened to sue the filmmakers' production company (and not Netflix). They demanded that the couple delete several embarrassing scenes. There was yelling, and lots of it.
It was naked intimidation, but the upshot was that lawyers for the opposing sides negotiated an agreement -- and the documentary got publicity to die for.
As for the effect on Donald Trump, just recall that, in 1971, Richard Nixon was reelected.
Why did ICE officials think that intimidation would work, and why did they think they'd get away with it? Was DHS remiss in not anticipating the kind of film the couple would produce? Are you going to watch "Immigration Nation" when it's released on Netflix?
And BTW, thumbs up to Caitlyn Dickerson, the reporter who broke this story. All the other articles on this topic lean on hers.
Photo "Bambi" by Mark Iocchelli is licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0
No comments:
Post a Comment