Destroying Small Boats in International Waters and House Joint Resolution 81
Is this about protecting America, protecting Trump, or steering the spotlight away from the Epstein files?
Maybe the real purpose of House Joint Resolution 81 is not national security. Maybe its purpose is to shield the President and his top officials from prosecution in courts that have jurisdiction over these killings.
MAGA Republican leaders in Congress are moving fast to pass a new law that shields the President from accountability for deadly attacks on boats far from American shores. Through the eyes of a lawyer, here’s my take on what’s happening and why the legal stakes are so high.
The President ordered strikes on boats operating hundreds of miles from the United States in international waters. No court ever determined who owned these boats or what they carried before missiles destroyed them and killed the people onboard.
The administration claimed the boats carried drugs. Maybe they did and maybe they didn’t. Of course I don’t want drugs in our country. But the real issues at play are much more than that. You know it. I know it. And I think most Americans know it too.
Look, even if the claim that drugs were on these boats is accurate, drug trafficking does not trigger the right of self defense under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. Under international law a nation may use lethal force on the high seas only in self defense, with UN Security Council authorization, or with consent from the flag state.
The United States may board and seize stateless vessels suspected of drug trafficking under the 1988 United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances and under bilateral maritime agreements. U.S. law such as 46 U.S.C. §70502 and §70503 authorizes boarding and seizure. It does not authorize sinking a ship and killing its crew unless the crew poses an immediate threat.
House Joint Resolution 81
Instead of using these checks, some members of Congress are trying to expand presidential power. House Joint Resolution 81 would authorize the President to use U.S. Armed Forces “as the President determines necessary and appropriate” against named Mexican cartels. That phrase is one of the broadest grants of authority ever written.
It delegates to one person the decision of when, where, and how to use military force with no requirement to prove an imminent threat, specify targets, or set time limits. History shows that presidents stretch such language far beyond the original intent. The 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force, meant for al Qaeda, has since been cited in conflicts across more than twenty countries.
The checks on such a law are weak. If this resolution becomes law the President would hold unilateral authority to order lethal action against any group labeled a cartel anywhere in the world, including in international waters, with almost no real-time oversight.
Were Crimes Committed?
The International Criminal Court has jurisdiction over war crimes and crimes against humanity if attacks are widespread or systematic and target civilians. Destroying vessels on the high seas without due process and without an armed conflict may meet those definitions. Domestic courts in other countries could also assert universal jurisdiction for extrajudicial killings.
The United States already has legal tools to stop drug trafficking at sea. The Coast Guard and Navy can intercept, board, and seize stateless vessels carrying narcotics. Federal prosecutors can bring charges in U.S. courts under the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act. These tools respect due process and preserve evidence for trial. Destroying boats and killing crews wipes out witnesses and proof, making the confirmation of facts and justice impossible.
Congress must defend its constitutional authority and refuse to delegate life and death decisions to the executive. The law already provides the power to interdict and prosecute drug traffickers. Expanding lethal authority is unnecessary, unlawful under international standards, and a direct threat to the separation of powers that keeps our democracy alive.
Maybe the real purpose of House Joint Resolution 81 is not national security. Maybe the purpose is to shield the President and his top officials from prosecution in courts that already have jurisdiction over these killings.
The International Criminal Court in The Hague can investigate and charge crimes against humanity and war crimes when attacks target civilians or take place without lawful justification. The International Court of Justice can hear disputes between nations over violations of the United Nations Charter and other treaties. U.S. federal courts, including the District of Columbia and the Southern District of Florida, have extraterritorial jurisdiction under statutes such as 18 U.S.C. §1119 for murder of U.S. nationals abroad and 18 U.S.C. §2441 for war crimes.
By passing an authorization that gives the President open-ended power, Congress may be aiming to create a domestic legal shield that future defense lawyers can wave before these tribunals to claim that these kinds of strikes are lawful acts of war. If so, I believe these kinds of maneuvers undermine constitutional checks, invite international condemnation, and erode the rule of law at home and abroad.
Mitch Jackson, Esq. | links
Related: They blew up a boat far offshore, killed eleven people, and called it justice
If you believe America can fight crime without shredding the Constitution, you belong here. My newsletter takes the headlines and strips away the legal jargon so you see what is really happening. I connect the dots politicians hope you overlook and hand you practical steps to push back. Subscribe today (free and premium), add your name, and pull up a chair. Your voice matters and your seat at the table keeps our democracy alive.
Trump and or Stephen Miller are getting away with murder literally. They will continue to defy our laws and international law. No one is holding them accountable so they keep pushing the envelope. Congress is in their pocket, the supreme court rubber stamps, whatever he does, and the international community is not taking strong action. It's really up to us the American people to raise our voices the challenges he's doing so much at once that it's hard to keep up and address each issue thank God for you Mitch. It's so exhausting. When will congress say enough is enough?