DHS Still Has a Civil Rights Team. Aliya Rahman Is Testing It. ⁠63%

By Sophie Hurwitz⁠64%

6/23/2026, 5:54:05 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 23 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Anecdotal, and Biased Writer Voice, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 40.4% saturation with 359 hits. Analysis detected 2,000 faulty-reasoning hits from 888 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 57.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠63% (7,981 of 21,180 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 62.30% of the article peer group.

When Aliya Rahman’s lawyers approached her about filing a complaint with the civil rights office of the Department of Homeland Security, she almost laughed in their faces. 
“It’s hard to imagine that sending a letter to DHS to ask them to respect our civil rights will do anything,” said Rahman, a disabled US citizen who was dragged from her car and detained by DHS agents during Operation Metro Surge in Minneapolis. 
Today, Rahman, who also has an ongoing civil tort claim against DHS, filed that complaint anyway. 
On January 13, ICE agents detained Rahman as she tried to drive to a doctor’s appointment, punching out the window of her car and carrying her by her arms and legs, ignoring her requests for mobility and communication aids, which Section 504 of the federal Rehabilitation Act is meant to guarantee. 
Eventually, the pain caused her to black out in her cell. 
Rahman contends that the agents’ aggressive treatment violated her civil rights as a disabled person. 
“We request that DHS take corrective action to not only redress these violations, but also to ensure all individuals with disabilities who interact with DHS officers are treated with dignity and respect,” Rahman's lawyers wrote in their complaint. 
Rahman described how ICE agents harmed her in congressional testimony organized by Sen. 
Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.): “Shooting pain went through my head, neck, and wrists when I hit the ground and people leaned on my back…I was carried face down through the street by my cuffed arms and legs while yelling that I had a brain injury,” Rahman said: 
“Agents repeatedly had to stop and ask how to do tasks. 
I received no medical screening, phone call, or access to a lawyer. 
I was denied a communication navigator when my speech began to slur. 
Agents laughed as I tried to immobilize my own neck. 
I asked for my cane and was told no, pulled up by my arms, and prodded forward in leg irons by an agent saying ‘Walk! 
You can do it. 
Walk.’ 
Agents did not know if the facility had a wheelchair. 
When I was finally placed in one to be taken to interrogation, an agent taunted: ‘You were driving right? 
So your legs do work.’” 
Section 504 prohibits discrimination against disabled people in programs and organizations that receive federal funding, which includes ICE. 
But Rahman’s experience, her lawyers said, was “not an aberration.” 
In one 2022 complaint, a Border Patrol officer allegedly took away the crutch of a child they apprehended and didn’t provide an alternative. 
Between 2019 and 2023, at least seven people with mental health disabilities were placed in solitary confinement in ICE custody. 
And in 2025, a Deaf DACA recipient was reportedly denied access to an American Sign Language interpreter for weeks. 
DHS' Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL), an internal body meant to investigate exactly these types of abuses, was gutted by then-Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem in March 2025, reducing its workforce from over 150 full-time federal employees to fewer than 40 a year later, nearly all of whom are contractors. 
DHS spokespeople did not provide current employment figures when asked, but stated that all of the office's “All of the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties' legally required functions continue to be performed, but in an efficient and cost-effective manner and without hindering the Department's mission of securing the homeland,” further alleging that “these offices obstructed immigration enforcement by adding bureaucratic hurdles and undermining DHS’s mission. 
Rather than supporting law enforcement efforts, they often functioned as internal adversaries.” 
Before CRCL was functionally dismantled, a complaint like Rahman’s would be read by its staffers, who would then issue recommendations. 
Now, though, she doesn’t necessarily expect that it will be read at all. 
“I don't think I'm going to hear from these folks,” Rahman said. 
“Typically, what they do is put out social media content when they're mad at me.” 
(DHS has issued posts implying that Rahman's conduct was criminal.) 
“I’m still rocking my supervillain braces, my shoulders aren’t healed yet,” Rahman told me June 22, showing off her shoulder support gear. 
“I’m just trying to put my body back together.” 
Thanks to her injuries, Rahman can only leave the house two or three days per week, she said. 
But as she heals, she’s become an advocate for others who have been detained or harmed by ICE, particularly those who are also disabled, many of whom don’t have the privileges she does: that she is a citizen, that she has savings, that she speaks English and has access to lawyers. 
“Many of them also had disabilities or chronic illnesses that were impacted by how they were handled, or they developed them afterwards,” Rahman said, and have learned—like her—that disclosing their disabilities can draw officers’ ridicule rather than accommodation. 
“People will say things like, you’re not disabled, you wear eyeliner,” Rahman said. 
“The guy inside [Whipple Detention Center] was like, ‘Your legs work, you were driving, right?’” 
Online, she sees families with autistic kids saying that they are terrified of any interaction with law enforcement. 
She doesn’t blame them. 
“I experienced people doubling down on violence when I raised that I was disabled, and that is not a society we can live in,” Rahman said. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 20.3%Sophie Hurwitz: 6.4%Mother Jones: 4.0%Confirmation Bias20.3%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 1.1%Mother Jones: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 9.7%Sophie Hurwitz: 4.6%Mother Jones: 3.2%Availability Heuristic9.7%This article: 5.4%Sophie Hurwitz: 1.0%Mother Jones: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic5.4%This article: 2.3%Sophie Hurwitz: 0.8%Mother Jones: 0.8%Hindsight Bias2.3%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 0.9%Mother Jones: 1.1%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 8.1%Sophie Hurwitz: 9.5%Mother Jones: 7.2%Framing Effect8.1%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 0.8%Mother Jones: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.8%Sophie Hurwitz: 0.4%Mother Jones: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.8%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 0.0%Mother Jones: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 1.5%Mother Jones: 1.6%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 8.2%Sophie Hurwitz: 1.5%Mother Jones: 1.7%Pessimism Bias8.2%This article: 40.4%Sophie Hurwitz: 13.0%Mother Jones: 9.6%Negativity Bias40.4%This article: 1.8%Sophie Hurwitz: 1.4%Mother Jones: 0.8%Self-Serving Bias1.8%This article: 1.4%Sophie Hurwitz: 1.8%Mother Jones: 1.0%Fundamental Attribution Error1.4%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 0.1%Mother Jones: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 5.7%Sophie Hurwitz: 2.6%Mother Jones: 1.1%In-Group Bias5.7%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 1.3%Mother Jones: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 1.0%Mother Jones: 1.6%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 0.8%Mother Jones: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 0.1%Mother Jones: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 1.9%Mother Jones: 1.1%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 0.7%Mother Jones: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 0.0%Mother Jones: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 2.6%Mother Jones: 1.9%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 1.6%Mother Jones: 0.6%Straw Man0.0%This article: 2.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 3.2%Mother Jones: 3.5%Appeal to Authority2.0%This article: 2.9%Sophie Hurwitz: 1.2%Mother Jones: 1.4%False Dilemma2.9%This article: 6.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 0.6%Mother Jones: 1.7%Slippery Slope6.0%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 0.0%Mother Jones: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 16.9%Sophie Hurwitz: 7.8%Mother Jones: 4.7%Hasty Generalization16.9%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 0.8%Mother Jones: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 0.6%Mother Jones: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 15.8%Sophie Hurwitz: 10.1%Mother Jones: 6.5%Appeal to Emotion15.8%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 1.6%Mother Jones: 1.1%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 3.5%Sophie Hurwitz: 1.4%Mother Jones: 2.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)3.5%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 0.3%Mother Jones: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 7.5%Sophie Hurwitz: 1.0%Mother Jones: 0.5%Burden of Proof7.5%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 0.0%Mother Jones: 0.3%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 5.7%Sophie Hurwitz: 0.4%Mother Jones: 0.3%Composition/Division5.7%This article: 17.8%Sophie Hurwitz: 5.5%Mother Jones: 2.3%Anecdotal17.8%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 0.1%Mother Jones: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 1.7%Mother Jones: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 0.0%Mother Jones: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 0.1%Mother Jones: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 0.0%Mother Jones: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 0.1%Mother Jones: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 0.4%Mother Jones: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 15.7%Sophie Hurwitz: 2.7%Mother Jones: 1.8%Unattributed Quote15.7%This article: 10.1%Sophie Hurwitz: 2.8%Mother Jones: 1.5%Quote-first Misdirection10.1%This article: 17.2%Sophie Hurwitz: 9.8%Mother Jones: 9.3%Biased Writer Voice17.2%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 1.7%Mother Jones: 1.8%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 4.9%Mother Jones: 4.6%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 1.0%Mother Jones: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophie Hurwitz: 0.2%Mother Jones: 0.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

888 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers69%attributed speech273writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageAliya Rahman • 44 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 51 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageAliya Rahman • 15 words • 100.0% coveragean exact person name drawn from the content • 38 words • 0.0% coverageAliya Rahman • 13 words • 100.0% coverageAliya Rahman • 46 words • 100.0% coverageAliya Rahman • 11 words • 0.0% coverageAliya Rahman • 12 words • 0.0% coverageAliya Rahman • 12 words • 0.0% coverageAliya Rahman • 10 words • 0.0% coverageAliya Rahman • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageAliya Rahman • 10 words • 0.0% coverageAliya Rahman • 19 words • 0.0% coverageAliya Rahman • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coveragean exact person name drawn from the content • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageHomeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem • 53 words • 100.0% coverageDHS • 67 words • 100.0% coverageDHS • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageAliya Rahman • 13 words • 0.0% coverageAliya Rahman • 12 words • 0.0% coverageAliya Rahman • 15 words • 100.0% coverageDHS • 10 words • 0.0% coverageAliya Rahman • 22 words • 100.0% coverageAliya Rahman • 9 words • 0.0% coverageAliya Rahman • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 51 words • 0.0% coverageAliya Rahman • 38 words • 0.0% coverageAliya Rahman • 13 words • 0.0% coverageAliya Rahman • 15 words • 0.0% coverageAliya Rahman • 18 words • 0.0% coverageAliya Rahman • 4 words • 0.0% coverageAliya Rahman • 26 words • 0.0% coverage
100%flagged-word coverage
53 attributed words8.6% of attributed speech98% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice+76.9 ptsWriter: 23.1%Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem: 100.0%100.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.