There have been a number of cross-border shootings on the Mexican border.
The shots have come from both sides. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/06/magazine/10-shots-across-the-border.html?_r=0
One of these cases made to the U.S. Supreme Court.
"It sounds like the beginning of a riddle: An American border patrol agent, standing in America, shoots a Mexican teenager, standing in Mexico.
But that’s exactly what happened on the El Paso-Juárez border. Now, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether the teen’s grieving parents are allowed to sue the man responsible. . . .
“This raises fundamental questions about the reach of protection under the Constitution,” said Deepak Gupta, a lawyer working on behalf of the teenager’s family. “It’s hard to understate how fundamental it is.” . . .
Americans have constitutional protections against the use of deadly force by federal officers. If those protections are violated, Americans have the right to bring a lawsuit against the officers involved. But Hernández was not an American, and he was not in the U.S. when he died.
Randolph Ortega, a lawyer representing the border patrol agent, says that simple fact makes it clear Hernández did not have constitutional protections."
http://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/2016/12/27/shot-fired-mexico-killed-teenager-andnow-supreme-court-will-weigh
Surprisingly, the Mexican family won at the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.
I think the precedents are on the side of the agent. The Guantanamo cases are not a precedent. Guantanamo was just' technically' a part of Cuba. The U.S. government exercised complete sovereignty there.
However, I would feel better about that result if I was sure there were effective Border Patrol sanctions consistently applied against officers who kill.
No comments:
Post a Comment