It’s the same as any other road trip.

There’s a big truck in front of you, a red line, and then a giant, white line.

You’ve got to stop, and wait for the big truck to go off the road.

Nowhere is this easier than at a big, white border between Mexico and the United States.

That line, like most of the U.S. border, is red and white.

And when Mexico’s Border Patrol agents stop you for a “no-interstate” traffic stop, the border is dotted with red and black signs warning you that you must stop immediately, and only then by the border guard.

The signs are not just for showing the border: They are for getting you to Mexico.

But there’s one small exception to the rule.

If the Border Patrol agent asks you if you’ve had any drugs in your car, you can tell them you have drugs in it, and they can take your car away.

That means that, even if you don’t have drugs inside the car, your car is considered a “traffic infraction” under the Border Enforcement Act.

It’s not uncommon for people to get pulled over for that reason.

That’s why the Border Act has been used to force the removal of thousands of Mexican migrants each year.

And it’s why a recent court decision made it illegal for the U,S.

Border Patrol to enforce a “Border Collision Avoidance Rule,” which would allow for the agency to stop migrants for traffic violations that could result in a detention and deportation.

In response to the court’s decision, the Border Protection Agency and its contractor, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), are pushing to change that rule.

That would make it easier for Border Patrol Agents to pull over migrants.

The FHWA is a separate agency, and the Department of Homeland Security is its parent agency.

But the FHSA is the one that oversees the Border, and that agency has authority over Border Patrol checkpoints and the enforcement of the “no travel” rule.

So the FHP has been pushing for changes to the Border Collision Prevention Rule.

As part of the rule’s implementation, FHP Director John Maresca has been arguing for a rule that would change the rules of the road, requiring agents to stop anyone who doesn’t have a valid, valid reason for a traffic stop.

In a letter to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform in May, Marescoa wrote, “I am hopeful that the Administration will consider and adopt this proposal as soon as possible.

I urge you to act quickly to make this happen, because we are in the middle of an epidemic of people being detained for traffic infractions at the UEP and other border crossings, and many of those people are in need of immediate assistance.”

MaresCA went on to say that a “high volume of border apprehensions” had led the agency “to seek to address the problem by modifying the existing Border Collisions Avoidance rules.”

But as it turns out, the rule change doesn’t just require agents to use the existing rule.

It would also require Border Patrol officers to check people for drug or weapons violations as part of their traffic stops.

If they find contraband, they could then detain the person for up to 72 hours.

If agents were to be found guilty of violating the rule, they would be charged with a misdemeanor, not the criminal infraction that is now punishable by a fine.

This change could have dire consequences for the tens of thousands, if not millions, of migrants crossing the U.-Mexico border each year without having drugs or weapons in their cars.

Marescas proposed a rule to the Department for Border Security that would allow Border Patrol’s to stop and search people for drugs, weapons, and other contraband as long as they were not being arrested or had a “reason to suspect contraband,” as defined by the rule changes.

Marenca’s proposal would also allow Border patrol agents to detain migrants in a Border Patrol vehicle for up-to 72 hours and to search their vehicles.

And if agents are found to have violated the rule of “no road travel,” they could face a fine of up to $1,000.

In an interview with MSNBC last month, Marencoa said that the Border Reform Act “would go a long way toward fixing the problem.”

And the FHCWA, which has been in charge of enforcing the rules, is working to implement Marescaras proposed changes.

On Monday, the FHBWA released a press release calling for a new rule that is “more effective and more efficient.”

It calls for an updated “enforcement timeline” for the rule that allows for more agents to be involved in enforcing the rule “by allowing for more aggressive enforcement” and a “flexible enforcement timeline” that allows agents to respond faster to Border Patrol checkpoint violations and “make timely decisions to move enforcement