Last Friday, an opinion by Texas federal judge Andrew Hanen opened a window onto the sheer lawlessness of the Obama administration–in particular, the Department of Homeland Security. The case was United States of America v. Mirtha Veronica Nava-Martinez. You can download the opinion here.Judge Hanen is located in the Southern District of Texas, Brownsville Division, and the Nava-Martinez case involved smuggling a child from El Salvador into the United States, illegally. The child’s mother, an illegal alien, paid a smuggler $8,500 to bring the girl from El Salvador to Virginia, but the smuggler was caught by DHS agents at a border checkpoint near Brownsville, Texas. Good, you might think: the Obama administration says it wants secure borders, so the human trafficker was turned back. Right?
Wrong. Let’s give the floor to Judge Hanen to explain what the record in the case showed:
The criminal conspiracy instigated by Salmeron Santos [the mother in Virginia] was temporarily interrupted when Nava-Martinez [the professional human trafficker] was arrested. Despite this setback, the goal of the conspiracy was successfully completed thanks to the actions of the United States Government. The Court is quite concerned with the apparent policy of the Department of Homeland Security (hereinafter “HHS”) of completing the criminal missions of individuals who are violating the border security of the United States. Customs and Border Protection agents stopped the Defendant at the border inspection point. She was arrested, and the child was taken into custody. The DHS officials were notified that Salmeron Santos instigated this illegal conduct. Yet, instead of arresting Salmeron Santos for instigating the conspiracy to violate our border security laws, the DHS delivered the child to her–thus successfully completing the mission of the criminal conspiracy. It did not arrest her. It did not prosecute her. It did not even initiate deportation proceedings for her. This DHS policy is a dangerous course of action.
The DHS, instead of enforcing our border security laws, actually assisted the criminal conspiracy in achieving its illegal goals. The Government’s actions were not done in connection with a sting operation or a controlled delivery situation. Rather, the actions it took were directly in furtherance of Y.P.S.’s [the little girl’s] illegal presence in the United States. … In summary, instead of enforcing the laws of the United States, the Government took direct steps to help the individuals who violated it. A private citizen would, and should, be prosecuted for this conduct.
We see that a lot with the Obama administration. If they were in the private sector, they would go to jail. Judge Hanen’s anger was prompted, in part, by the fact that the case before him was not unprecedented, or even unusual:
This is the fourth case with the same factual situation this Court has had in as many weeks. In all of the cases, human traffickers who smuggled minor children were apprehended short of delivering the children to their ultimate destination. In all cases, a parent, if not both parents, of the children was in this country illegally. That parent initiated the conspiracy to smuggle the minors into the country illegally. He or she also funded the conspiracy. In each case, the DHS completed the criminal conspiracy, instead of enforcing the laws of the United States, by delivering the minors to the custody of the parent illegally living in the United States….
[T]here is no explanation. The DHS has simply chosen not to enforce the United States’ border security laws.
The Obama administration has tried to come up with explanations for why it is helping felons to break our laws at taxpayer expense, but its efforts, the Court says, are pathetic:
The Government also implies by its response to the Court that the Homeland Security Act of 2002 somehow authorizes its participation in this conspiracy. Again, there is nothing in this Act that directs and authorizes the DHS to turn a blind eye to criminal conduct, and certainly nothing that compels it to participate in and complete the mission of a criminal conspiracy or to encourage parents to put their minor children in perilous situations subject to the whims of evil individuals. These actions are both dangerous and unconscionable.
So, who pays for the DHS’s magnanimous efforts to partner with the Mexican cartels to violate U.S. law? What a silly question! You do:
In each of these cases, the Government also incurred significant expense to help complete the conspiracy. In all cases when the Government apprehended some of the traffickers, the Government transported the children across the country to unite them with a parent (or parents) who was in the country illegally. In one situation, the Government flew a child to multiple locations in different parts of the United States. The taxpayers of the United States suffer the expense of delivering these minors.
The Court goes on to explain why the cost of assisting the Mexican cartels in achieving their criminal goals is large. Further, this whole corrupt and illegal operation is putting the lives of children at risk:
The DHS is rewarding criminal conduct instead of enforcing the current laws. More troubling,the DHS is encouraging parents to seriously jeopardize the safety of their children. While Y.P.S. was transported in a car, others are made to swim the Rio Grande River or other bodies of water in remote areas. This concern for the safety of these individuals is not fanciful or theoretical; it is a real and immediate concern. As this Court waited for the judgment to be prepared before it released this opinion, two illegal aliens drowned, two more are missing, and a three-year-old El Salvadorean toddler was found abandoned by smugglers–an event occurring just outside of Brownsville.
After all of this, Judge Hanen still wasn’t done. The Obama administration’s failure to obey the law concerns the Court, he said, for three “unassailable reasons.”
First, and most importantly, these illegal activities help fund the illegal drug cartels which are a very real danger for both citizens of this country and Mexico.
Mexican cartels control most of the human smuggling and human trafficking routes and networks in Texas. The nature of the cartels’ command and control of human smuggling and human trafficking networks along the border is varied, including cartel members having direct organizational involvement and responsibility over human smuggling and human trafficking operations.
So the Obama administration is partnering with Mexican drug cartels to violate U.S. laws. But it gets worse:
This Court need not list the dangers involved for minors, or even adults, who are being smuggled into the United States. In the last year, this Court has seen instances where aliens being smuggled were assaulted, raped, kidnapped and/or killed.
This is what the Obama administration is facilitating and encouraging. Judge Hanen goes on to cite empirical studies of the evils done by Obama’s partners, the drug cartels, in the course of their highly-profitable child-smuggling operations:
Smugglers also regularly use violence, extortion, and unlawful restraint against illegal aliens. In some cases, they are forced to perform labor, and females–including minors–may be sexually assaulted.
These are the violent criminals with whom the Obama administration collaborates to achieve illegal goals, rather than arresting them.
Judge Hanen points out that when the Obama administration helps drug cartels to violate our laws successfully, and get paid for doing so, it can only encourage more evil:
Time and again this Court has been told by representatives of the Government and the defense that the cartels control the entire smuggling process. These entities are not known for their concern for human life. They do not hire bonded childcare providers to smuggle children. By fostering an atmosphere whereby illegal aliens are encouraged to pay human smugglers for further services, the Government is not only allowing them to fund the illegal and evil activities of these cartels, but is also inspiring them to do so. The big economic losers in this scenario are the citizens of the United States who, by virtue of this DHS policy, are helping fund these evil ventures with their tax dollars.
There is more; follow the link to read it. The shocking reality is that the Obama administration–specifically, Obama’s Department of Homeland Security–has entered into partnership with the Mexican drug cartels to assist in the smuggling of illegal aliens into the United States, thus assuring, among other things, that the cartels get paid and will want to do it again. Judge Hanen concludes with this:
The DHS should enforce the laws of the United States–not break them.
It seems like little enough to ask, but lawbreaking rather than law enforcement will be the order of the day until we have a new president.
I don’t think Barack Obama is as evil as the vicious killers who head the Mexican drug cartels. The cartels have horrified the world with their mass murders, their torturing of innocent people, their hanging of decapitated bodies from highway overpasses and stacking of cut-off heads next to roadways. But one wonders: why does Obama want to partner with these inhuman mass murderers? Why did he ship them thousands of lethal weapons through the Fast and Furious program? Why has he ordered his Department of Homeland Security not to arrest the cartel members who traffic in small children, but rather, to partner with those criminals to achieve the goals of their illegal conspiracies, and to assure that the cartels will be paid, even though countless U.S. laws are broken along the way? Why has Obama transformed DHS, which was supposed to be a law enforcement agency, into a collaborator with the world’s most homicidal gangs? Maybe there is an innocent explanation for Barack Obama’s conduct, but I can’t think what it might be. We may need to reassess our charitable judgment of Obama’s character.