AZMEX POLICY 10-6-19

AZMEX POLICY 10 JUN 2019


The Supreme Court Weighs in on Border Shooting
June 3, 2019
Patriotamerica

https://patriotforamerica.com/2019/06/03/the-supreme-court-weighs-in-on-border-shooting/

Border patrol and security continues to be an extremely divisive issue. The Supreme Court has been involved in prior cases related to constitutional rights violations.

The Supreme Court is now looking at the issue of if a person is not from this country, and they want to sue because of harm they received from border patrol. The question centers around an existing case where shots were fired across the border that resulted in the death on a Mexican person.

The Supreme Court is set to hear such a case and make a ruling soon. In the case of Hernandez v. Mesa, a person was killed when shots were fired over the border during a border issue.

Such issues are bound to rise as more illegals try to cross the border. There has also been an increase in drug traffic and human slave traffic in the past few years.

Law officials are under the protection of qualified immunity for any actions that they take while on active duty. In 1971 there was a case that provided an exception to the rule.

In a case called Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents as allowance was made for people to sue civilly law enforcement that would seem to violate federal law against civilians.

In the case, the Supreme Court is to soon hear from the family of Adrian Hernandez Guereca, who was shot and killed by federal agents. The family claims that their son and his friends were playing a game where they run and touch the fence and run back to a starting point.

At that moment a shot was fired which killed Hernandez. The agent was on the U.S. side when the shot was fired.

Bob Hillard, who is the attorney for the Hernandez family, has stated, "The deadly practice of agents, standing in the United States and shooting innocent kids across the border must be stopped. It's never right. It's never constitutional. That is one of those times when morality and our U.S. constitution line up perfectly."

During the investigation back in 2012, the Obama era Justice Department had a different story behind the shooting.

They claim that the shot fired was aimed at smugglers that were attempting to cross the border. They claim that the people being fired at were throwing rocks at agents that were trying to detain a person of interest.

It was determined during the investigation that there was not enough evidence to warrant federal charges against the agents involved.

It was also determined that no federal civil rights charges were able to be claimed either. The case has gone all over the court system for the past several years.

Once it reached the Fifth Circuit Court the ruling was against the Hernandez family.

The court ruled the way they did because foreign people living in another country do not have the same rights as an American citizen would have. There are also border security issues that have to be considered as well.

The court also determined that these matters actually must be taken up with the Executive Branch and the Legislative Branch since foreign policy is heavily involved.

Not too long after the decision was made, the government of Mexico weighed in on the case. They claimed that the case is much more clear than it is being made out to believe. The agent used to much force and it resulted in the death of a child.

Mexico claims that national security is not involved at this point.

The Trump administration has not been silent as they have agreed with the court's decision and back up what they have stated.

With all the publicity over this incident, this decision by the Supreme Court will have ramifications that will be felt for many years to come.

What they decide to do will either overturn prior decisions and open the door for more civil cases to be developed or it will put it to rest after many years.

If the court decides that civil action can be taken, the Hernandez family would still have to present their case and prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that their version of the story is true in order for them to win the case.

END