Law Professor Jonathan Turley discusses the legality of the U. S. military operation that resulted in the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro by the Trump administration. Turley argues that Trump did not require congressional approval for this action, despite opposition from Democrats.
1. Legal Precedent: Turley references the capture of Manuel Noriega from Panama in 1989 as a legal precedent that justifies Trump's actions. He mentions that other presidents have acted similarly without congressional approval.
2. Context of the Operation: The operation occurred in Caracas, Venezuela, where the U. S. military seized Maduro and his wife. Maduro faces a pending 2020 indictment in New York. Turley claims that the operation aligns with executing a criminal warrant against Maduro, similar to the legal framework used against Noriega.
3. Democratic Opposition: Democrats have condemned the operation, labeling it unlawful. However, Turley encourages them to consider past cases, specifically the Noriega prosecution, which he believes supports Trump's actions.
4. Consistency of Presidential Power: Turley asserts that previous presidents, including Barack Obama, have conducted operations that did not require congressional approval. He argues that if Obama could kill an American citizen without prior charges, Trump can capture a foreign leader with a pending indictment.
5. Media Commentary: Turley has publicly discussed this topic, asserting that the legal arguments surrounding Maduro's case are weaker than those in Noriega's case, but still sound enough to back Trump's operation.
Turley concludes that the legal basis for Trump's actions against Maduro is solid, despite the outcry from Democratic lawmakers. He believes that historical precedents support the legality of such military operations without the need for congressional consent.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2026/01/law-professor-jonathan-turley-trump-did-not-need/
No comments:
Post a Comment