3 ms·

If the US has zero jurisdiction, then what are they paying for, exactly?

• s1artibartfast 2y ago
  They were(are?) paid to take the people, lock them up, and make an example of them . That doesn't mean US courts, government, or officials, have any legal power in el Salvador. It is unclear if there is even a legal contract in place. It is really all quite unpresidented.
  • ty6853 2y ago
    I can think of one case where a father, who worked as a technical contractor in Iraq to support his child, was held hostage by terrorists and therefore missed his child support. On returning to the US, he was imprisoned. Physically being unable to pay was not held to be a valid excuse to miss child support. Somehow when it comes to holding citizens for contempt against a court order, it is no problem that the citizen was powerless to fulfill the order. But if an official does it then everything is fine. At some point I would hope the courts see through this. Maybe El Salvador can keep the guy forever and we can't do anything about it. And then just like the hostage, the judge should be able to keep these people in jail for contempt until the guy is released, whether it ever happens or not. They owned it when they did it, too bad so sad if they cannot fix it and they're held in contempt.
    • s1artibartfast 2y ago
      I don't disagree. If you are responsible for someone and their legal rights, that does not change if you send them somewhere outside your jurisdictional control and ability to ensure they are met. In fact, it is a reason not to do just that. This is pretty well established in law.