yep. the disconnect you're feeling comes from thinking you're living within the normative state, when in fact you're under the prerogative state:

> The dual state is a model in which the functioning of a state is divided into a normative state, which operates according to set rules and regulations, and a prerogative state, "which exercises unlimited arbitrariness and violence unchecked by any legal guarantees".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_state_%28model%29

Is this not very different from Carl Schmitt's idea of Decisionism[0]? (I think his is more fleshed out philosophically and has a more general character)

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decisionism

I'd argue all top down states are "prerogative"... and "normative" is merely a temporary alignment of expectations and exercised power

Yes. You not knowing whether you are in trouble or not is a feature, not a bug.

This administration is overstepping legal bound left and right. If they want you in trouble, you'll be in trouble. Appeals to law, even if successful, will take too long.

And inversely, if you break the law, and they 'like' you - then you are freed or never even charged in the first place.

Land of the free/saviour of the free world.

Welcome to the Authoritarian States of Sycophancy. Or ASS. As we are referred to around the world.

that is the point - to make you scared to fly your drone, anywhere, anytime. That is among the main differences between democratic society and the rest - a citizen of democratic society knows the extent of his rights, and where he would be crossing the line into violation of law, and that makes the citizen pretty assertive in his rights. That assertiveness isn't compatible with the non-democratic societies (or with authoritarian abuses of power in a [still overall] democratic society).

> If I am flying my drone and an unmarked ICE vehicle drives within half a mile am I in trouble?

That depends on whether you support Dear Leader.

It sure would be nice of them to do that!

I can't wait to see this tested in court. While IANAL the EFF sure has lawyers and their argument seems petty sound.

Really this just seems like a waste of government money. They can shoot down drones and arrest people but those people will get court cases and they'll win and the gov will (and has) have you pay out fines. I'm not a fan of paying people to harass others...

> I can't wait to see this tested in court.

Today, yes, but if the fascist cancer is around for too long, more and more judges will be its appointed tools.

I don’t think they really care about paying out fines, that would be a cost of doing business. The point is to make sure that footage like the Pretti execution can never happen again, because that’s what tanks their support. If they have to pay out a bunch of fines to get that assurance, so what? The fines are paid by our tax dollars anyway, it’s not like they’re actually harmed or deterred by them.