Jared
LightNews LightNews
banner
jaredmcclain.bsky.social
Jared
@jaredmcclain.bsky.social
2.2K followers 1.1K following 990 posts
Civil Rights Lawyer

“Crusading against government officials and the immunity doctrines that protect them." -St. Tammany Parrish Sheriff's Office

Contractually obligated to say that my opinions are my own
Posts Replies Media Videos
Reposted by Jared
chadstanton.blacksky.app
“The task force is a sprawling multiagency operation that includes officers from 31 federal, state, and local agencies, including the Drug Enforcement Administration, Tennessee National Guard, Department of Homeland Security, Department of Defense, and Tennessee Highway Patrol,”
Trump’s Deadly Invasion of Memphis
A Black city tried to rein in abusive policing. Then Trump’s task force arrived.
hammerandhope.org
October 6, 2026 at 7:42 PM
jaredmcclain.bsky.social
@nicolefoy.bsky.social is back with another massive report on citizen detentions by DHS.

As the piece acknowledges, the 500+ victims is almost certainly an undercount.

Verifying these detentions takes an incredible amount of work. And most go unreported.
October 6, 2026 at 3:37 PM
jaredmcclain.bsky.social
My first CD, Christmas ‘94
October 4, 2026 at 1:06 AM
jaredmcclain.bsky.social
This mass surveillance tech is unconstitutional even if it’s used “properly.”

Unsurprisingly, though, it’s often abused. Here’s our tracker of just the reported incidents of ALPR abuse:

ij.org/the-ij-datab...
October 3, 2026 at 1:31 PM
Reposted by Jared
reichlinmelnick.bsky.social
Suuuuper interesting, I was not tracking this. The judge found the law criminalizing noncitizen voting is a voter qualification statute, and therefore outside of Congress’s power.

Surprisingly, this is an issue of first impression!

Decision is here: storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
The best reading of the actual statute that underpins this criminal case yields an inescapable conclusion: 18 U.S.C. S 611 is a voter qualification statute, and the Constitution does not authorize Congress to legislate voter qualifications for federal elections. Except for very specific constitutional provisions (that cannot support this statute; we will go through them, Congress has no power to say who can vote or who cannot vote in federal elections-that foundational power is reserved for the States, and limits Congress. Some legal principles are so fundamental that they form American constitutional bedrock, and this case reveals a big one: When you're prosecuted based on a law that Congress did not have the authority to pass, the prosecution cannot stand. That principle in federal law harkens back to cases like Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 180 (1803), and United States v. Hudson, 11 U.S. 32, 34 (1812), and has had explicit and unbroken support in criminal cases since Ex Parte Siebold, 100 U.S. 371, 376-77 (1879) ("An unconstitutional law is void, and is as no law. An offence created by it is not a crime. A conviction under it is not merely erroneous, but is illegal and void, and cannot be a legal cause of imprisonment."). The principle is so fundamental that it even predates our constitutional republic; it lies at the very heart of our constitutional heritage. See, e.g., Bayard v. Singleton, 1 N.C. 5, 9-10 (1787) (striking down a legislative act as unconstitutional and holding that a court cannot enforce an unconstitutional law in any type of proceeding). This principle acts as a shield for every person facing criminal prosecution in the United States, citizen and non-citizen alike. That shield protects the Defendant here, and none of the Government's arguments break through it.
October 2, 2026 at 9:00 PM
jaredmcclain.bsky.social
Those weirdos at the Manhattan Institute just lost their biggest talking point
jaredmcclain.bsky.social Jared @jaredmcclain.bsky.social · 4d
A federal district court just held that police use of Flock cameras without a warrant violates the Fourth Amendment.

storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
constitutionally collect this information about one car-and its driver-by following that vehicle on public roadways over a month. But this leaves the question of why is it the government's business where everyone goes all the time? The government cannot go snooping through our personal lives and business without an adequate basis to do so. That is what the Supreme Court has said since its decision in Katz through its decision in Chatrie this year, nearly sixty years later. It is not too much to draw the line at indiscriminate mass surveillance. No doubt, ALPR technology comes with remarkable benefits that the Court cannot ignore. But the Fourth Amendment requires courts to draw a line when the cost is too great. Alaniz's search in just the ALPR system provided him with more than 50 individual records of Kyle's whereabouts across the country for an entire month. The Court finds that because the ALPR systems Alaniz used to search Kyle's historical location information intruded on her reasonable expectation of privacy in the whole of her physical movements, it was a search under the Fourth Amendment. Based on the information in the record, the only reason Alaniz conducted that search was because he saw her license plate was from California. That search was not supported by probable cause, and it was done without a warrant in violation of Kyle's Fourth Amendment rights. That search also has a nexus to the remainder of the traffic stop because Alaniz began following Kyle's car while
October 2, 2026 at 9:41 PM
jaredmcclain.bsky.social
A federal district court just held that police use of Flock cameras without a warrant violates the Fourth Amendment.

storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
constitutionally collect this information about one car-and its driver-by following that vehicle on public roadways over a month. But this leaves the question of why is it the government's business where everyone goes all the time? The government cannot go snooping through our personal lives and business without an adequate basis to do so. That is what the Supreme Court has said since its decision in Katz through its decision in Chatrie this year, nearly sixty years later. It is not too much to draw the line at indiscriminate mass surveillance. No doubt, ALPR technology comes with remarkable benefits that the Court cannot ignore. But the Fourth Amendment requires courts to draw a line when the cost is too great. Alaniz's search in just the ALPR system provided him with more than 50 individual records of Kyle's whereabouts across the country for an entire month. The Court finds that because the ALPR systems Alaniz used to search Kyle's historical location information intruded on her reasonable expectation of privacy in the whole of her physical movements, it was a search under the Fourth Amendment. Based on the information in the record, the only reason Alaniz conducted that search was because he saw her license plate was from California. That search was not supported by probable cause, and it was done without a warrant in violation of Kyle's Fourth Amendment rights. That search also has a nexus to the remainder of the traffic stop because Alaniz began following Kyle's car while
October 2, 2026 at 9:37 PM
Reposted by Jared
taniel.bsky.social
goes back to this quote from the story below:

“The fact that they didn’t take the cameras down shows that we are the product. What they are doing is selling to much bigger agencies the ability to spy on a ton of people.”
taniel.bsky.social Taniel @taniel.bsky.social · Mar 18
NEW: When a Wisconsin mayor ended his city's contract with Flock (the AI surveillance company), he was stunned to see Flock refused to remove cameras.

So he covered them with plastic bags.

Now local activists are taking their fight to Madison & the Dane County sheriff, wanting more cameras gone.
This Wisconsin City Ditched AI Surveillance Cameras. Now Activists Want to Keep Going. - Bolts
Last November, the city of Verona, Wisconsin, voted to pull out of the sprawling surveillance network run by tech company Flock Safety in hopes of protecting residents’ privacy and preventing... Read ...
boltsmag.org
October 2, 2026 at 12:51 AM
Reposted by Jared
alexldeluca21.bsky.social
New: A Florida county discovered Flock cameras along its roads that officials didn’t know were there.

No one has publicly claimed them. Who has operated them — and who has had access to their data — remains a mystery.

www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2026/...
Florida county discovers mysterious Flock cameras with no obvious owner
Officials say they don’t know who installed the controversial cameras or how the data was being used. Residents are unnerved.
www.washingtonpost.com
October 1, 2026 at 11:57 AM
Reposted by Jared
jaredmcclain.bsky.social
One big thing we’re trying to establish with this case is that a prosecutor leading a grand jury investigation is acting as an investigator, not presenting the state’s case in court.

That means you get to sue them just like you would a cop who led a bad investigation to violate your civil rights.
1. Precedent and history confirm that grand juries serve an investigative function that precedes a prosecutor's role as an advocate. As discussed, prosecutorial immunity protects only those acts "intimately associated with the judicial stage of the criminal process." Buckley, 509 U.S. at 271 (citation omitted). A grand-jury investigation necessarily precedes an indictment and, with it, the judicial stage of the criminal process. The eventual return of an indictment "does not retroactively transform" the prosecutor's investigative work into a prosecutorial function. Id. at 275-76. The district court's decision to the contrary mistakenly focused on the grand jury's eventual indictments rather than Billy's preceding investigation, for which he's subject to suit. A grand jury "is a grand inquest, a body with powers of investigation and inquisition." Blair v. United States, 250 U.S. 273, 282(1919). It "belongs to no branch of the institutional Government [.]" United States v. Williams, 504 U.S. 36, 47 (1992). The "ex parte investigation" a grand jury conducts is non-adversarial, "to determine whether a crime is committed and whether criminal proceedings should be instituted." United States v. Calandra, 414 U.S. 338, 343-44 (1974) (emphasis added). A prosecutor's use of the grand jury to build a case by subpoenaing documents and witnesses is investigative. ' Those steps necessarily occur before the grand jury determined there was probable cause to return the indictments. Even if the prosecutor has, in his own mind, decided he will eventually seek an indictment, he continues to function as an investigator so long as he's trying to gather evidence to plug holes in the case. See Buckley, 509 U.S. at 273-74; Watkins, 986 F.3d at 663. A prosecutor is not functioning in his prosecutorial capacity while he is still searching "for the clues and corroboration that might give him probable cause to recommend that a suspect be arrested." See Rivera, 359 F.3d at 1353.
October 1, 2026 at 3:13 PM
Reposted by Jared
jaredmcclain.bsky.social
We filed our brief in the Eleventh Circuit last night, explaining why prosecutors do not get absolute immunity when they help gather evidence to have someone arrested.

The facts of Escambia County DA Stephen Billy’s conspiracy to punish school board members and journalists are nuts.
Cover page for Appellera-cross-appellant’s principal and response brief in Digmon v. Billy, 11th Cir case number 26-11358 STATEMENT OF THE CASE When the school board in Escambia County, Alabama, decided not to renew the superintendent's contract, the county prosecutor, Stephen Billy, pressured them to let her keep her job. He told the Board that he'd worked with the superintendent personally and warned that, in his "professional opinion," voting against her would violate the Board members' oaths of office. To ratchet up the pressure, Billy also announced that he was conducting a "secret investigation" into some Board members and had been collecting "statements and affidavits." Billy issued the Board at least five subpoenas, warned he had "complete control" over the grand jury, and said he'd charge Board members with a felony if they "divulged" his investigation. After the Board voted again not to renew the superintendent's contract, Billy searched for evidence to justify pretextual arrests. He subpoenaed one Board member's phone records, helped the Sheriffs Office get a search warrant for her and another Board member's phones, and advised the Sheriffs Office to also seize the payroll supervisor's phone without a warrant. Based on this evidence, Billy advised the Sheriffs Office that they could arrest the two Board members, Sherry Digmon and Cindy Jackson; the payroll supervisor, Ashley Fore; and Don Fletcher, a journalist who'd written about his threats and one of his subpoenas. Sherry was arrested three times in the six weeks following the vote. The phone seizures and arrests were all based on the same baseless legal theories that Billy had threatened to use against the superintendent's opponents-disclosing grand jury documents, talking badly about the superintendent, and baseless claims of ethics violations.
October 1, 2026 at 3:09 PM
jaredmcclain.bsky.social
We filed our brief in the Eleventh Circuit last night, explaining why prosecutors do not get absolute immunity when they help gather evidence to have someone arrested.

The facts of Escambia County DA Stephen Billy’s conspiracy to punish school board members and journalists are nuts.
Cover page for Appellera-cross-appellant’s principal and response brief in Digmon v. Billy, 11th Cir case number 26-11358 STATEMENT OF THE CASE When the school board in Escambia County, Alabama, decided not to renew the superintendent's contract, the county prosecutor, Stephen Billy, pressured them to let her keep her job. He told the Board that he'd worked with the superintendent personally and warned that, in his "professional opinion," voting against her would violate the Board members' oaths of office. To ratchet up the pressure, Billy also announced that he was conducting a "secret investigation" into some Board members and had been collecting "statements and affidavits." Billy issued the Board at least five subpoenas, warned he had "complete control" over the grand jury, and said he'd charge Board members with a felony if they "divulged" his investigation. After the Board voted again not to renew the superintendent's contract, Billy searched for evidence to justify pretextual arrests. He subpoenaed one Board member's phone records, helped the Sheriffs Office get a search warrant for her and another Board member's phones, and advised the Sheriffs Office to also seize the payroll supervisor's phone without a warrant. Based on this evidence, Billy advised the Sheriffs Office that they could arrest the two Board members, Sherry Digmon and Cindy Jackson; the payroll supervisor, Ashley Fore; and Don Fletcher, a journalist who'd written about his threats and one of his subpoenas. Sherry was arrested three times in the six weeks following the vote. The phone seizures and arrests were all based on the same baseless legal theories that Billy had threatened to use against the superintendent's opponents-disclosing grand jury documents, talking badly about the superintendent, and baseless claims of ethics violations.
October 1, 2026 at 3:09 PM
jaredmcclain.bsky.social
Last night, @ij.org won a jury trial against a Texas sheriff’s office using ALPRs to flag cars for pretextual stops and K9s to falsely alert.

ij.org/press-releas...
9:134 •1 ? • • INSTITUTI I for TUSTICH five steps: First, surveillance cameras across the state and country recorded license plates and logged when and where cars went. Second, analysts and anonymous tipsters flagged ordinary travel, like driving toward the border and back, as suspicious. Third, Bexar County sheriff's deputies invented a traffic violation to justify pulling over the flagged driver. Fourth, deputies pulled drivers into their front seats, interrogated them and asked consent to search their car. Finally, fifth, if the driver refused to consent to a search, a K-9 alert from a manipulated dog supplied the probable cause to search ij.org anyway. This practice happened for 9:144 1 X & LUSTITE® 三 The tip reached Bexar County through a group chat on WhatsApp, a private messaging app, called the "Northwest Highway Group." Deputy Babb testified the information came from a man he knew only as "Kiki," who Babb believed worked at a federal fusion center in Laredo. To make the stop, Deputy Babb parked on the shoulder, waited for the truck, followed it, and eventually stopped it. Babb said the reason for the stop was that Alek had drifted across the fog line on the road. Evidence shown at the trial showed Schott never veered outside the lines.
September 29, 2026 at 1:21 PM
jaredmcclain.bsky.social
I went on the Consequential Actions podcast to talk about the legal theory behind some of my cases and our efforts to get SCOTUS to incorporate the Seventh Amendment:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-YL...
Humboldt County's Cannabis Fines & the Civil Jury | Jared McClain, Institute for Justice
YouTube video by Jeff Kellick
www.youtube.com
September 25, 2026 at 8:41 PM
jaredmcclain.bsky.social
The corrosive effect is real.

On Monday, the chief district judge in southern Alabama, a Trump appointee, ruled DHS construction site raids are unconstitutional in 3 ways.

Almost all the comments in response have said DHS won’t listen and SCOTUS won’t make them.

That’s really bad for society.
audrelawdamercy.blacksky.app Barred and Boujee aka Madiba Dennie @audrelawdamercy.blacksky.app · 11d
the Court “cannot expect the public to have faith in our judicial system if, without clear explanation, we are consistently greenlighting harmful acts”

i continue to think putting KBJ on the Court may be Biden's best decision, no other justice is doin it like her

www.nytimes.com/2026/09/24/u...
Justice Jackson Calls Emergency Docket ‘Potentially Corrosive’
Hours after fielding the Trump administration’s latest emergency application, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson gave a speech urging the Supreme Court to rethink such requests.
www.nytimes.com
September 25, 2026 at 2:41 PM
Reposted by Jared
404media.co
Cops followed EJ Carrion home and arrested him in his drive way one week after he said 'bullshit' at a county meeting in Texas. Here is that body cam footage.

@mjgault.bsky.social reports: www.404media.co/watch-body-c...
September 24, 2026 at 2:47 PM
Reposted by Jared
jaredmcclain.bsky.social
My colleague Alasdair Whitney testified at the Senate hearing on Flock today about how it’s bad for the government to monitor all our movements.
Photo of five witnesses being sworn into today’s hearing
September 24, 2026 at 3:34 AM
jaredmcclain.bsky.social
My colleague Alasdair Whitney testified at the Senate hearing on Flock today about how it’s bad for the government to monitor all our movements.
Photo of five witnesses being sworn into today’s hearing
September 24, 2026 at 3:34 AM
jaredmcclain.bsky.social
A quick little explainer on Monday’s ruling from my colleague Jaba Tsitsuashvili

www.tiktok.com/t/ZTyNhU135/
September 23, 2026 at 9:45 PM
Reposted by Jared
nicolefoy.bsky.social
Pretty significant news, especially getting a preliminary injunction in a state like Alabama. Comes from the lawsuit filed by Leonardo Garcia Venegas, the U.S. citizen and Alabama resident detained three times by immigration agents. www.propublica.org/article/immi...
September 21, 2026 at 3:41 PM
Reposted by Jared
craigburley.bsky.social
Just finished reviewing Jared's incredible response to DHS's reply to his motion. I honestly think this injunction was won 100% on the back of good lawyering. A systematic destruction of DHS's positions that the judge followed like Ariadne's thread. (Made it public on Courtistener.)
September 21, 2026 at 5:27 PM
Reposted by Jared
clancyny.bsky.social
Very important case for immigration enforcement. 3 policies central to numerous ICE abductions are stayed. Decision by Chief U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Beaverstock, Southern District of Alabama.
jaredmcclain.bsky.social Jared @jaredmcclain.bsky.social · 15d
NEW: Leo Garcia Venegas, detained three times by DHS, just won a major victory in his case.

The court stayed three DHS policies: Immigration agents can no longer raid construction sites without a warrant, round up workers based on how they look, and refuse to let them go after they show a REAL ID.
jaredmcclain.bsky.social Jared @jaredmcclain.bsky.social · May 5
On Saturday, Leo Garcia Venegas was wrongfully detained by ICE for a 3rd time in a year.

Officers followed him home; he said he’s a citizen and had his REAL ID in hand. But they didn’t care. They tackled and shackled him, no questions asked.

We’ve got a hearing tomorrow on our prelim injunction.
September 21, 2026 at 4:32 PM
Reposted by Jared
ericumansky.bsky.social
Last year, we detailed how immigration agents profiled and grabbed one citizen not once but twice. Then, they did it *again.*

Now, a federal court has ordered agents to back the eff up.

www.propublica.org/article/immi...
jaredmcclain.bsky.social Jared @jaredmcclain.bsky.social · 15d
NEW: Leo Garcia Venegas, detained three times by DHS, just won a major victory in his case.

The court stayed three DHS policies: Immigration agents can no longer raid construction sites without a warrant, round up workers based on how they look, and refuse to let them go after they show a REAL ID.
jaredmcclain.bsky.social Jared @jaredmcclain.bsky.social · May 5
On Saturday, Leo Garcia Venegas was wrongfully detained by ICE for a 3rd time in a year.

Officers followed him home; he said he’s a citizen and had his REAL ID in hand. But they didn’t care. They tackled and shackled him, no questions asked.

We’ve got a hearing tomorrow on our prelim injunction.
September 21, 2026 at 4:24 PM
jaredmcclain.bsky.social
NEW: Leo Garcia Venegas, detained three times by DHS, just won a major victory in his case.

The court stayed three DHS policies: Immigration agents can no longer raid construction sites without a warrant, round up workers based on how they look, and refuse to let them go after they show a REAL ID.
jaredmcclain.bsky.social Jared @jaredmcclain.bsky.social · May 5
On Saturday, Leo Garcia Venegas was wrongfully detained by ICE for a 3rd time in a year.

Officers followed him home; he said he’s a citizen and had his REAL ID in hand. But they didn’t care. They tackled and shackled him, no questions asked.

We’ve got a hearing tomorrow on our prelim injunction.
Photo of Leo being led by five ICE agents into the back of an unmarked ICE vehicle. His hands are cuffed behind his back and he’s in leg shackles. 5. I left the store around 7:20 a.m. and began driving home. I was approaching my house when I noticed an unmarked vehicle following me closely that appeared to be law enforcement. 6. I parked my car in front of my house and turned off the engine. 7. The officers pulled in front of my vehicle to block it in. They exited their vehicle and quickly approached my truck. 8. Without a word, the officers tried to open my driver's side door, but it was locked. Because I already experienced two immigration raids, I knew it was important to tell them I was a citizen and use my REAL. ID to prove my lawful status. So, I took out my Alabama Star ID, unlocked the door, and immediately told the officers that I am a United States citizen. 9. Still without asking me a single question or issuing any lawful commands, the officers pulled me out of my car, tackled me to the ground, and shackled me around both my arms and legs. 10. The officers did not listen when I said I was a citizen. And they showed no interest in looking at my Alabama STAR ID, even though it is a REAL. ID issued only to people who can prove their lawful status. 11. Within two minutes of when I stopped in front of my house, a few other cars arrived, including a K-9 unit with the local police. 12. There were about seven or eight officers in total surrounding me. All but two of those officers were dressed in plain clothes with tactical vests and appeared to be ICE agents. The other two wore uniforms of the local police. At least one of the local police officers arrived with a K-9. 13. The initial stop was initiated by the ICE agents, and it was those ICE agents who took responsibility for my arrest. 14. The ICE agents led me, shackled, to one of their cars and placed me in the back seat. At this point, the officers still had not asked me a single question or bothered to look at my Alabama Star ID that would have shown they had no basis for my detention.
September 21, 2026 at 4:06 PM
jaredmcclain.bsky.social
Now that we settled against Humboldt, I can finally post my favorite part of discovery.

Their code enforcement officer kept saying he'd go in every Monday to 50 voicemails from people they fined.

His attorney tried to get him to say 50 was an exaggeration. Turned out it was an enforcement quota:
Transcript from deposition. Opposing counsel asks if 50 voicemails on Monday was hyperbole, and the witness responds "No, it was generated based on the fact that management wanted us to post 50 notices a week." Opposing counsel just says, "Oh, I see."
September 11, 2026 at 4:09 PM