Maybe some of my friends who know more about American Law can straighten me out, but I have a great deal of difficulty believing that the Constitution gives the American President the authority to commit child abuse.
How can the President impose such a tough sentence on children as to take them away from their parents without at least putting the children on trial?
It would be one thing if it could be argued that there was no choice, and that the children must be separated in order to put the parents on trial for a misdemeanor attempt to enter the country illegally.
I tend to buy Alan Dershowicz's argument that the President can't be put in jail for breaking the law, and if he does break the law, he can issue a pardon for himself. So good luck to those who think they can catch the President on a technical infraction--say, campaign finance or sending classified information in email or Tweet. You're not going to put him in jail in 2025 when his term is up. Or if you can do that, then every single President from now on is going straight to jail after their term is up.
But, what the Constitution does provide is a way for Congress to act when they see that the President is acting illegally. They may remove him from office. The Impeachment process, as best I understand it, is not a legal trial that generates a conviction and jail sentence. But it does take him out of office.
So you could argue that the separation of parents and children is an administrative procedure to allow the parents to stand trial. But it is also a legally administered punishment, and probably the worst thing you could do to a small child, to take a child away from the parents and give the child to someone else. This is the cruelest form of child abuse I could ever imagine, and it is very hard for me to understand how it is not a punishment, particularly if it is demonstrably avoidable. The President has used his power to increase the number and the severity of these punishments, it's an action he committed. It didn't just happen.
Ok, legal scholars, help me here. Does the President have the legal right to torture anyone he wants, including babies and small children? And he can take away children or parents without trial? Or is it okay because they are not citizens? Or maybe it's okay if it is considered an "administrative procedure" rather than punishment? If this isn't cruel and unusual punishment, without trial, then what it is it?
Ok, legal scholars, help me here. Does the President have the legal right to torture anyone he wants, including babies and small children? And he can take away children or parents without trial? Or is it okay because they are not citizens? Or maybe it's okay if it is considered an "administrative procedure" rather than punishment? If this isn't cruel and unusual punishment, without trial, then what it is it?
Or has the President has wrongfully and flagrantly exceeded his legal authority systematically seeking to break up the family units of illegal immigrants? This is so horrific, is a minor apology and corrective Executive Order enough? I don't believe he can be sent to jail, but should Congress exercise their power to review the President's a actions and force him to GO? Or if they do not, is it because they lack the Constitutional authority? Or merely the heart?