I am having trouble with the following question. "Defendants conspired to transport 191 Ecuadorian nationals into
the United States illegally aboard a 54-foot fishing vessel. A U.S. Navy helicopter sighted the overcrowded vessel off the Guatemalan coast and saw that it had no lights and flew no flag. A Coast Guard detachment found the passengers with little food, or water, and the defendants were indicted in the United States for conspiracy to induce aliens to illegally enter the United States, and attempting to bring unauthorized aliens to the United States. (8 U.S.C. 1324). The statute does not mention jurisdiction. The defendants argued that the statute did not apply extraterritoriality. Does it? Why or why not? Do you think the "Bowman Exception" applies in this case as described in the U.S. v. Campbell. Why or why not? The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, were planned overseas. Where are immigration offenses planned? How is that relevant to this legal analysis?
Thank you for your help!
Recently Asked Questions
- "What causes armed aggression" ? (international relations perspective )
- Shaw-Taylor argues the nation is fighting three wars: crime, drugs and terrorism. What are some commonalities and differences you see in fighting crime,drugs,
- Three arguments under the realist perspective provide explanations for the cause of WWI: 1.Rigid bipolar balance and preemptive war 2.Threat of changes to