|
|
||
|
Columns
/ Current
Issue / Goldberg
File / Nota
Bene / Subscribe
/ Ad
Info / Washington
Bulletin / Home
|
||
|
"Because unilateral actions by the INS, in this case as well as others, raise serious quesions of civil liberty, we call on Congress to hold hearings to examine the implications for the rule of law in this nation."
|
|||
|
5/09/00
11:00 a.m. |
|||
|
"By
enforcing its own order, without the judicial imprimatur of a court mandate,
the Justice Department has reinforced a precedent that endangers the rights
of all American citizens." "The
armed invasion of the home of Elian's relatives in Miami by federal officers
combat-ready with the deadliest of military rifles, the shocking abduction
of the boy seen around the world, are so unconstituional and cruel that
they keep hope alive that this time the courts and congress will not allow
the White House to get away with it." "Ms.
Reno's decision to take the law as well as the child into her own hands
seems worse than a political blunder. Even if well intended, her decision
strikes at the heart of constitutional government and shakes the safeguards
of liberty."
The Rule of Law
Yet due process and the rule of law are precisely what are now at issue in this case. The president and the attorney general have insisted that the government had both the right and the duty to break into Elian's Miami home "to enforce the decisions of the INS and the federal courts." But the Executive Branch is not a law unto itself. Just two days before the raid, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals had rejected the Justice Department's request to order Elian removed from the home of his American relatives, saying "we decline to proceed in that manner." Moreover, the court expressed serious doubts about the Justice Department's reading of both the law and its own regulations, adding that Elian had made a "substantial case on the merits" of his claim. In reaction to the court's opinion, the Justice Department apparently decided to take matters into its own hands. On Good Friday evening, after offices had closed, the department sought a "search" warrant not from the judge familiar with the case but from a night-duty magistrate, submitting a supporting affidavit that seriously distorted the facts. Armed with that dubious warrant, it launched an early morning paramilitary raid. Given the court's already established jurisdiction over this case, the government's precipitous actions constitute a serious and deeply disturbing intrusion into the authority of the judicial branch of government, raising profound questions about the separation of powers. Because unilateral actions by the INS, in this case as well as others, raise serious quesions of civil liberty, we call on Congress to hold hearings to examine the implications for the rule of law in this nation.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
Columns
/ Current
Issue / Goldberg
File / Nota
Bene |
||
|
National Review 215 Lexington Avenue
New York, New York 10016 212-679-7330 Customer Service: 815-734-1232.
Contact
Us.
|
||