Prosecute Biden officials for trafficking? – AMAC
Public commentators have recently argued, out of deep frustration, that Biden administration border agents should be prosecuted for failing to enforce the laws, protect citizens, and do their jobs—that is, for allowing human and drug traffickers to enter the southern border of the United States.
The argument is attractive, but difficult to make. Biden officials are surely complicit in undermining American public health and safety, casually allowing human and drug trafficking to explode, overdoses topping 100,000 a year, and illegal aliens crossing the southern border. People are angry!
Objectively, the policies were turned upside down a year and a half ago. Trump’s border wall, travel ban, and executive orders were halted, including Trump’s executive order “to employ all lawful means to enforce the immigration laws of the United States.”
Biden and the cabinet issued executive orders limiting enforcement action, limiting deportations, shipping inland illegals, and objectively endangering public health and safety. 6,000 ICE law enforcement officers average one arrest every two months.
All illegals, unless caught, are free to roam – unless convicted of a crime. Case-by-case assessment requirements encourage illegal crossings. We saw 1.3 million illegal passers-by between January and September 2021, the highest for such a period. This does not count the “leaks”, about 1000 per day.
Meanwhile, drug trafficking and foreign-source overdoses have exploded. About 12% of unaccompanied minors have COVID, and after May 2022, Biden will no longer enforce Title 42, which protects cross-border Americans with communicable diseases.
The anecdotal data is equally infuriating, with “planes full of undocumented migrant children” being flown across the country, often at night. Others are being dispatched by bus, as Border Patrol agents are paralyzed and overworked.
So why can’t those who endanger public health and safety be prosecuted under anti-human trafficking and anti-drug laws? The question is good, the principle is right, but the delay is long – legally.
In short, human or narcotics traffickers – who benefit in any way from official or unofficial complicity, from promotion to harboring – are potentially liable for related crimes.
Likewise, those involved in acts of negligence, gross negligence, or recklessness, otherwise seeking to facilitate the failure to do their duty, could reasonably be held liable.
However, rubbing in any federal prosecution is triple. Firstno federal prosecutor, who works for the attorney general, who works for the president, will press charges against a federal employee doing the president’s bidding.
Second, federal laws are specific and require hard-to-prove, even if sensible, elements that would find a federal employee involved in human or drug trafficking – unless they personally benefit, know that he violates the law, is part of a criminal enterprise, or otherwise clearly violated federal law.
However, state laws also exist — in every state — against human and drug trafficking. State’s Attorneys don’t work for the United States Attorney General or all Democratic Governors, so in theory, a law capable of describing a criminal act committed by a federal official, which occurred or had a result in the state, could open liability.
That said, this too is difficult. State laws require specifics – like profiting from the act – that are likely missing. Additionally, laws like Section 1983, which give citizens the right to sue for civil rights violations, also provide “qualified immunity” to government officials.
What is qualified immunity? The concept dates back to the 1870s, codified in Act Section 1983. It basically says that a government employee cannot be prosecuted if they (1) believe in good faith that their conduct was lawful, or (2) that the conduct was objectively reasonable.
A jury might find – if a prosecutor were so bold – letting illegal aliens or traffickers inside was presumptively and objectively unreasonable, but section 1983 would protect them if the government official “believed in good faith that their conduct was legal.
Most federal officials, even if they were hardline socialists, communists or anarchists, would likely believe that their actions — directed by orders from Biden — were at least theoretically legal.
The result is that we have a federal government that under Biden objectively endangers public health and community safety, especially if Title 42 is lifted and contagious aliens are released inside – can -be some with foreign drugs.
On the other hand, these offenses are primarily political in nature, not benefiting government employees, just under Biden’s indefensible and politically motivated policies.
What is the answer? Public discussion – and recognition that the nation’s public health and safety are at risk if the laws we hope to protect are not enforced, but undermined.
Perhaps more accurately, while federal and state lawsuits are limited except for personal gain, the answer is clear. He is at the polls – in November.
We hope you enjoyed this article. While you’re here, we have a small favor to ask of you…
Support the AMAC action. Our 501(C)(4) advances initiatives on Capitol Hill, in state legislatures, and at the local level to protect American values, free speech, the exercise of religion, equal opportunity, the sanctity of life and the rule of law.
If you like articles like this – Subscribe to AMAC’s daily newsletter
and download the AMAC News app
Register today Download
If you like articles like this, subscribe to AMAC’s daily newsletter!