Imagine for a minute that you are shopping at a grocery store and are about to purchase all your gathered groceries. You witness a shady person trying to exit the store in a hurried fashion. Suddenly, a member of the store’s security staff grabs the person before he/she can exit the store.
A subsequent search of the person reveals multiple store items found that have not been purchased. The local authorities, who had already been summoned, arrive to investigate.
As a normal witness to this scenario, you rightfully assume that this person that was exiting the grocery store is guilty of theft. In fact, anywhere in the world, this person is guilty of theft. There is no dispute that this person did the crime and will therefore suffer some kind of consequence.
Whenever a person breaks the law and is caught red-handed, they will suffer a penalty or some kind of consequence unless, of course, you break an immigration law. Obviously, you must be thinking about the lawlessness of the last few years of the Biden Administration spearheaded by the treasonous Alejandro Mayorkas. This article would be too predictable and unimaginative if that was the case.
Although the Biden Administration is guilty of dereliction of duty, I am referring to their complicit partners of the Assistant U.S. Attorney’s Office (AUSA). These are basically attorneys that “represent” the United States as they prosecute cases in which the defendant(s) have violated federal law.
In other words, every illegal entry into the United States, every illegal alien smuggling case, every narcotic case apprehended by a Border Patrol agent is presented to an AUSA. The attorney then decides whether to prosecute the case or not.
Again, I’m not talking about laws that the Biden Administration refuses to enforce, I am talking about actual cases that agents apprehend, process, and present for prosecution. The AUSA many times simply declines prosecution. The AUSA make it so difficult to prosecute cases, they serve as a deterrent for agents who want to do their jobs.
Be mindful that these are people that got caught red-handed like the person trying to sneak out of the store without paying for merchandise. So, why is the AUSA declining prosecution? There are several reasons, and you will be shocked by every one of them. However, for the sake of brevity, I’ll just mention two.
These are two of the most common reasons that AUSA declines agent’s cases. Reason #1: There are insufficient material witnesses to pursue prosecution. The fact that an agent just caught a person driving a vehicle with 12 illegal aliens hiding inside is not enough evidence. The agent must develop or present two credible material witnesses.
Let’s go back to our store example so you can wrap your brain around this reasoning. Imagine the thief telling the Police Officer, “Officer, this security officer saw me through the cameras but no one else can corroborate his allegation.” Of course, that would never happen because the security officer’s account is more than enough to arrest and prosecute this thief! However, is a Border Patrol agent’s account not sufficient?
Reason #2 The agent did not present sufficient evidence that the law breaker had knowledge that a crime was being committed. In other words, if the smuggler claims that he/she didn’t know that the people he was smuggling were in the country illegally, then he had no knowledge that he was committing a crime. Therefore, this smuggler will be set free because the AUSA will decline prosecution.
The fact that 12 people were stuffed in a vehicle and lying down to avoid detection is not sufficient evidence? Is the fact that all the occupants are illegal aliens, except for the driver, not sufficient evidence? The agent must prove that the driver/smuggler knew that he was transporting illegal aliens is the threshold.
To continue with our store thief example, it would be like the thief saying, “I didn’t know that these items belonged to the store.” As ridiculous as this sounds, this is happening every day to Border Patrol agents. The very few cases that agents are allowed to pursue to uphold immigration law are being challenged every step of the way.
It isn’t being challenged by defense attorneys; it’s being challenged by our attorneys. The attorneys that allegedly represent the government against the law breakers of our Constitutionally derived laws. Not enforcing the law is one thing, but purposely neutralizing the law is another!
Writer’s note: If you like this and other articles that I post, be the first to be in the know by following me on Facebook: Joel Maldonado.Author Politics. You can also follow me on X (formerly Twitter) @Maldonation. However, if you want to be the most knowledgeable on this whole immigration mess, get a copy of my book The Binding Oath: A Border Patrol Journey and the Mayorkas Effect.
