I think this violates the 5th and 13th. These people wouldn’t be within the custody of the United States penal system, yet the jurisdiction of the US would still apply if they are paying for these inmates. Slavery is only legal if penance for a crime, but the foreign country would be carrying it 1/ - ThreadSky

sjoyner1965.bsky.social • 15 hours ago

I think this violates the 5th and 13th. These people wouldn’t be within the custody of the United States penal system, yet the jurisdiction of the US would still apply if they are paying for these inmates. Slavery is only legal if penance for a crime, but the foreign country would be carrying it 1/

Comments

sjoyner1965.bsky.social•15 hours ago

Out. That means that the United States would be forcing another country to carry out penance for this misdemeanour to those within its jurisdiction (they’re still paying), even though El Salvador does not have the jurisdiction for carrying out penance for that crime. Also no trial=no due process.

sjoyner1965.bsky.social•15 hours ago

The reason El Salvador can’t carry out penance for a crime is that they lack the jurisdiction. Otherwise, foreign countries could incarcerate US citizens in, say, France, bc they were convicted of homosexuality in Saudi Arabia. If someone guilty of a crime flees, the legal procedure is extradition.

sjoyner1965.bsky.social•15 hours ago

So, if the US has jurisdiction over these men but is also not exacting the penance for the crime, then the act of servitude as penance for a crime is void. Someone who goes to jail in Norway can’t have their time served erased in the US. Furthermore, they have not committed a crime in El Salvador.

sjoyner1965.bsky.social•15 hours ago

Because the United States is not the power exacting the penance, and carrying out the servitude, it’s almost as if the servitude were null and void. However, the US has jurisdiction over these people, as the DOJ argued, and are enforcing the conviction.

sjoyner1965.bsky.social•15 hours ago

That is to say, El Salvador would not be punishing these men were it not for the actions of the United States, who still has jurisdiction. I would also argue that the language of this order also refutes the birthright citizenship EO

sjoyner1965.bsky.social•15 hours ago

As that EO argued that undocumented immigrants were not subject to the jurisdiction of the US.

fairrobina.bsky.social•14 hours ago

This violates everything

Posting Rules

Be respectful to others
No spam or self-promotion
Stay on topic
Follow Bluesky's terms of service

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply