The Problem With Designating Cartels as Terrorist Groups (Foreign Policy Mag)
Trump wants broader powers, but U.S. businesses could suffer.
snips....
Drawing from the Immigration and Nationality Act, an FTO designation freezes all of a group’s assets under the control of U.S. financial institutions, prevents its members from traveling to the United States, and allows their deportation. Perhaps most importantly, it makes it a crime for U.S. citizens and others to knowingly provide material support for the group. Material support means not only weapons and money but also time and the labor of individuals. This clause has allowed the United States to prosecute individuals engaged in the kind of support for an FTO that would not otherwise be illegal, such as planning to travel to Syria to train with the Islamic State or fundraising for a group such as Hezbollah.
Admittedly, the TCO designation does not have quite the same material support clause as an FTO one. But much of the cartels’ activity is already illegal, given the nexus to narcotics, drug trafficking, and other criminal activity. Moreover, support for a TCO is punishable by criminal penalties up to 20 years in prison or $1 million in criminal fines. Violators of the Kingpin Act can face criminal penalties of up to 30 years in prison and/or a $5-10 million fine. The FTO material support clause is broader and offers sweeping investigatory and prosecution authorities. But in the context of cartels, that clause is susceptible to overreach and could have adverse consequences.
The new executive order does not provide any criteria to explain when a TCO will be deemed an FTO. But if major cartels in Mexico and elsewhere are listed, the impact on many U.S. companies and U.S.-Mexico business relations could be considerable. Well before the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel, banks and payment processors such as PayPal avoided doing business in the West Bank, fearing that their services might be used by terrorist groups—and that they would be held liable for any resulting violence. With the new executive order, U.S. businesses must worry that when they work with a business in Mexico, it might have links to cartels, which are deeply embedded in Mexico’s economy. Banks and payment processors that help transfer remittances to Mexico would be vulnerable to prosecution. All this will make U.S. businesses more cautious, especially about new ventures, given the tremendous litigation risk.
A zealous prosecutor could also use the new material support power to prosecute Americans who purchase drugs—or avocados—from designated cartels. Their crime would no longer be limited to possession of narcotics (or pursuit of the best guacamole); it would count as material support for a terrorist organization. It sounds far-fetched, but the United States has aggressively gone after U.S. residents who aided the Islamic State, including prosecuting a woman who provided packets of hot cocoa as well as a small amount of money to a group member. Justice Department officials in past administrations did not usually take such an expansive view, but such an approach is easier to imagine today. Making America’s drug epidemic a terrorism problem will not solve the drug crisis. Instead, it will dramatically increase the number of Americans prosecuted for drug-related offenses—and lengthen prison sentences for those convicted.
https://archive.ph/gDfj5
WalMart and banks will be an accessory to terrorism.
Cuellar must really be looking at a pardon now. That bank he has connections to is affiliated with cartels.
Also, he designates the Gulf Cartel as a terrorist group. Let's rename it Gulf of America Cartel.
= new reply since forum marked as read