Wow...and Justices Thomas and Scalia were on different sides of the decision?
And I though Clarence Thomas was just some sort of minstrel dancer for Justice Scalia
Isn't that what Harry Reid and Company think?
We are the world
I am a little confused on this one. Some of the justices are talking about "tax evasion" and the others about "wire fraud". It would appear from the article that the issue is wire fraud, and the U.S. prosecuted for same. At the same time, Canada did not choose to pursue tax evasion(?). Strange.
So why are the others talking about "tax evasion" and prosecution for same as a basis, or part of, their opinions?
No, she prefers to use laws and opinions of foreign countries only to overturn the will of American voters and duly elected state legislatures.
"It may seem an odd use of the federal government's resources to prosecute a U.S. citizen for smuggling cheap liquor into Canada," Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the majority. "But the broad language of the wire fraud statute says so."
The laws says they committed a crime. Unless the law violates the Constitution, the Justices have no reason to intervene. The decision to prosecute them lies with the Executive branch, not the Judicary. Thomas understand this.
Once again Ginsburg blatantly overstepps the authority of the Court.
"In a dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg argued that U.S. courts have no place enforcing the tax laws of a foreign country, particularly when it chooses not to pursue prosecution."
They were not charged with tax evasion, they were charged with wire fraud. If the Canadian government chooses to go after them for tax evasion we can let them have them after they've served their time here. The US is responsible for US law, and wether or not the Canadians choose to enforce their laws is none of the court's concern.
"Today's novel decision is all the more troubling for its failure to take account of Canada's primary interest in the matter at stake," she wrote, noting that U.S. defendants could have been extradited to stand trial in Canada.
Canada's interests are none of her concern. Foreign policy is not part of her job description. Canada's choice to to request extradition or not to request it is none of her concern.
"Canadian courts are best positioned to decide whether, and to what extent, the defendants have defrauded the governments of Canada and Ontario out of tax revenues owed pursuant to their own, sovereign, excise laws," Ginsburg said. "
The defendants clearly committed fraud. In wiring the money, the committed wire fraud in the United States.
Ginsburg's opinion that it should be Canada that is addressing this issue is irrevalent. Our prosecutor chose to charge them with breaking US law. The question is did they break US law, and is that law constitutional. The Courts have no authority to impede the prosecution unless the law was not broken or the law was unconstitutional.
Ginsburg is blatantly failing to do her duty as a Supreme COurt Justice. She doesn't even make an attempt to hide her activism. She needs to be removed from the court.
If they had been charged with Smuggling across our borders, I could buy into that.
This crap about prosecuting American citizens in American Courts for crimes committed on Foreign soil however has to stop.
She was joined in her dissent by Justices Stephen G. Breyer, Antonin Scalia and David H. Souter.
I agree with the minority in this case. Are we going to enforce the tax laws of North Korea or Belarus?