Posted on 07/11/2022 6:24:41 AM PDT by Salman
:: a New York resident who travels to Nevada for some bunny ranch time ::
You have not answered the inquiry...not even started to answer.
Please re-read the scenario.
Sorry, quick response.
Still violations of the Mann Act do not depend on State jurisdiction as it is interstate trade for illicit purposes.
Elliot Spitzer got stung, federally.
Still reading further.
:: jurisdiction ends at their borders which is 3 miles off their shores ::
Agreed, yet the “patient” needs to travel through (over) a state and if the patient is paid to do so by another person in order to avoid prosecution, where do we stand other than expanding the Mann Act?
An off-the-wall thought is that one State can sue another State for ending the life of it’s resident.
But that is a long shot...
” will Cajun Navy do something about it?”
Attacking a flagged vessel at sea is legally privacy. In international waters the Captain of that ship can capture said pirates and summarily execute them under international piracy law or use military grade defences, read rockets, artillery or missiles to sink pirate vessels on sight. International piracy laws are no joke. If US citizens attack a foreign flagged vessel they are committing an act of piracy by definition and also possibly starting a war of those attacks carry state backing or approval. Attacking ships in international waters with nation state backing is a codified act of international warfare.
Sorry I conflated state courts and Federal courts and was not clear which court has standing.
The state court has no standing in out of State matters. The Mann Act has been used in Federal Court to cross state lines as Federal government claimed standing via the commerce clause and Federal supremacy clause.
This admin at the Federal level will not use those standings to help States wanting to cross state lines. A new admin might. The broader issue is what is good for the goose is good for the gander do you want legal precedence to be set that one States laws apply to every other state one of their residences stands in? Do you want NYS or California gun laws to have standing in Florida or Texas because that’s exactly the standing that will be held once precedence is set.
Or do we honor the founding fathers and hold residences are freemen from bondage to the state. We are citizens of the USA not subjects to New York or Florida where we sleep matters not we are free sovereign people free to travel at will from state to state that right is in the constitution, we are free to reside at will in any state, and free to leave and return to any state at will. Only the US Federal government holds passports over us only only they can invoke or revoke citizenship.
Rainbow Warrior. Discuss...
“Actually they tried such an idea in SoCal in the late 40s, early 50s. They parked a gambling ship right outside the 12-mile limit (it might have been 3-mile limit back then). Local DA got around it by going after the water taxis that hauled the gamblers out to ship.”
Interesting search for precedence. I looked it up. None of the local DA’s were able to get serious charges to stick on judicial review at the higher state and then Federal levels. The issue was past the 3mile limit the state has zero standing. At first the gambling ships were trying to just skirt off the three mile limits inside bays which they argued the three miles is from the shore not the mouth of the bay. In the end they moved 12 miles out into Federal waters and it was not until Truman signed the Kirkland bill in 1948 putting into law 50 USC code 1081 and 1082 that prohibited any flagged ships in Federal territorial waters from hosting gambling and any us flagged ship on the high seas from being a gambling ship not on a covered voyage to a foreign port as defined by IRS code 1986 from hosting gambling. To this day you can go to Galveston and get on a cruise ship that goes off shore into the high seas and gamble it’s never a USA flagged ship always out of the Bahamas or Panama or Cayman Islands once they hit 12 miles and are steaming away from shore Bob’s your uncle as USC 1081 doesn’t apply to non us flagged ships outside Federal territorial waters.
The Dutch run a ship that does reproductive services on the high seas in fully international waters. Even if Paxton tired in Texas to make a state law against water taxis it would fail if those boats first went to a waiting boat in international waters transferred passengers to that boat not run by American’s nor licenced here and that boat went to the Dutch ship. The state of Texas has zero and I mean ZERO standing in international waters they could try to pull the go after the taxi route but if a transfer of passengers happens in international waters where they go from there is protected under UNLOS laws. American’s are free people we have the constitutional right to leave a state at will for any reason we also have the constitutional right to leave the USA and it’s territories, waters and possessions at will this is a FUNDAMENTAL constitutional right. it shocking that so called conservatives get all fascist when they don’t like people doing something. If you don’t want something in your state get your legislature to make a rule against it and you don’t have to allow it inside your state then. You do not own residences of your state they are free people you also cannot force them to move or harass them for activities outside your States jurisdiction which is limited for a good reason.
Feel free to look up USC 50: 1081 that is what really ended off shore gambling ships the state of California was powerless once they hit Federal waters and they knew it so they lobbied a Federal law to push it to international waters where it is still practiced today in the Gulf of Mexico.
Monsters are real.
They want to murder innocent little preborn babies.
Yep, the off-shore gambling ships were a bit of a challenge to law enforcement back in the day. Don’t know how much business an off-shore abortion ship would do. Thing is, gambling ships generated enough income to make the hassles worthwhile. How much money would an abortion ship make as opposed to how much it would cost to operate?
I think it would be both easier and cheaper for Gulf-state women determined to end their pregnancy to drive up I-55 to Illinois.
Yes
Could this specific scenario - which is not out of the realm of reality (and I would guess actually happens) - could this specific scenario be referenced to expand the Mann Act to “capture” “interstate trade of abortion”?
It is just an interesting question at this point...
Thanks, packrat
There is a gambling cruise ship that takes you on a 3 hour cruise off Cape Canaveral, FL. Been doing it for years.
If it is foreign flagged, it must comply with the Passenger Vessel Services Act, which requires the ship to visit a foreign port before returning to its originating American port.
A foreign-flagged ship cannot transport Americans between two different American ports, either, even if it stops at a foreign port.
-PJ
Boats only float if the hull is intact.
I am not a lawyer but its possible. They stretch laws to mean more than what was intended all the time.
The Passenger Vessel Services Act doesn’t apply to gambling cruises that start and end at the same port. It’s easy to see the flags of the ship they are required to fly them entering and leaving port. I listed the three I personally have seen while going on gambling cruises out of the port of Galveston. Another FR pointed out cruises out of Florida I would bet a months pay those ships are Bahamian or Cayman Islands flagged.
A ship in international waters is under no liability to the U.S. USC code let alone a piddly little states penal code. Only if a ship makes a port call would that foreign flagged ship fall under first USC code in contiguous and then Federal territorial waters and inside 3 miles while over the submerged land of the states which is the legal term for the seabed inside three nautical miles.
No health-care ship would be foolish enough to port call in a red state or really even in the USA. For the Gulf of Mexico the country of Mexico, Cuba, the Bahamas, the Cayman Islands would all be ports of call to get diesel and supplies. Bermuda ,Canada, the Azores could serve the East Coast.
The Passenger Vessel Services Act only applies to ships originating at US ports of call. Besides a health care ship is not moving passengers from port A to B they are taking on people at anchor in international waters or at the very least at slow orbits in deep waters. None of those ships would be American flagged so immune to American federal laws on the high seas and absolutely immune to state laws as the states are expressly prohibited in the constitution from having international jurisdiction with ANY foreign nation, not relations,not treaties, and not criminal or civil codes. Texas could no more tell a Panamanian ship what to do or hold it’s Captain liable than someone standing on the moon both are equally out of reach from a state’s laws. We have a Federal system that handles per the constitution to have a single entity handle foreign policy and relations.
Pirates get hung on the spot or shot, just saying. Attacking a ship in the high seas is piracy by definition and the Captain of the ship in duress can use as much force as he see fit to repel boarders and maintain the integrity of his ship. Armed private security forces could be hired and could open up with automatic weapons fire on pirates. Most countries allow their flagged vessels to hire private sector security. Rocket launchers and ASuW missles plus cannons are carried by some flagged vessels ask the chicoms they arm their merchant fleet to the teeth it’s their rights under the open LOS laws. I always got a kick out of those antiwhale idiots all it would have taken was for a Captain to radio a distress signal of piracy then open up on them with real weapons and sink their ship any survivors should have been picked up , given a trial on the ship of attack then shot and dumped back in the sea all of that would be in the rights of that Captain. The world has 400+ years of legal standing against pirates you don’t want to be declared an actual persona non grata no protected by international law of the Sea.
-PJ
I understand what you're saying.
The thought that the left is saying that crossing state lines is too much of a burden, but ferrying a pregnant woman out 12 miles at sea in open water on a small boat is okay, just boggles my mind.
As I've said before, it's the same twisted logic that says that getting a voter ID is too big a hurdle, but EBT cards are easy to get.
SMH.
-PJ
I have seen three flags on the ships out of Galveston, Bahamas, Cayman Islands and Panamanian. USC 1081&1082 still prohibits US flagged vessels from being classed as gambling ships who’s primary revenue source is gambling and not on a trip as defined by the IRS 1986 sea vessel voyage type.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.