An Illegal Coup to Oust an Illegal President: Legal Adventures in Honduras

A Honduran protester stands in front of a home made fire in the streets of Tegucigalpa, Honduras.

This past week, political unrest has escalated in the small central American nation, as calls of an alleged 'coup-de-tat' escalate after the arrest of Honduran president Manuel Zelaya by the armed forces.

This is indeed a coup-de-tat. And technically, an illegal one. However, the circumstances concerning the situation don't emulate the typical military coup we are used to seeing in the 'Banana Republics.' In fact, it's actually a lesson in the importance of checks and balances.

Based on my research of the crisis, this is a basic chronology of events:

1. President Zelaya, hoping for a consecutive term (currently illegal in the Constitution), decides to seek a referendum gauging the people's support for a new constitution.

2. The Supreme Court, Attorney-General, and Congress (yes, both judicial AND legislative bodies) bodies declare referendum illegal.

3. Ignoring ruling, Zelaya fires attorney-general and sends his own personal security forces to raid Army depot where the ballots are stored. Congress discusses impeachment.
Ousted Honduran President Manuel Zelaya: friends with Hugo Chavez, but clearly not as savvy.

4. Army, supposedly under orders from the Court, arrests Zelaya and exiles him to Costa Rica. Congress declares new President, while Zelaya protests his ouster.

That being said, the appointment of the new president before impeachment of the current one is what makes this an illegal coup-de-tat. Prior to the installation of a new president, the actions of the Honduras government and military were completely legitimate. After his installation, well, not so much...


Supposed 'resignation' letter signed by Manuel Zelaya. Good one. Don't you love it when the 'good guys' are sketchy, too?




Now, this whole thing did not come up just because the President wanted a simple referendum. Zelaya's behavior concerning the private sector and media since his election in 2006 have been less than satisfactory. Nationalizations, government intrusion in corporate media and staunch support for far-left policies offer an understanding of why the Honduran government was so eager to depose of him.

However, once again, the lack of due process concerning Zelaya has officially made this coup illegal. Honduras needs to bring back Zelaya, try him, convict him, then make their coup legal.

Or they can just get rid of him the old fashioned way...

Buena suerte con esta, Honduras...

Overhaul of the blog

Well, it's been a few weeks and my posts on this blog have been inconsistent at best. I'm going to change the nature of this blog and basically use it to post anything I find interesting and newsworthy and publish my opinion on it. I think that will allow me to express more interest (and motivation) in keeping up with 'immigrationinflation' more readily.

Right now, viewership does not matter so much to me, at least until I can find a groove. So, in honor of that 'search for groove,' expect posts from me concerning, well, anything!

Of course, immigration is of great interest to me, so expect plenty of it ;)

'Immigration Bill this year? Don't bet on it.'

This title was taken from a Washington Post article referring to congressional apathy concerning immigration. Of course, understandably, we have a lot of other (and arguably more) important matters at hand. This could also be based on the fact that core solutions proposed by Barack Obama don't really exist. Through my research, Democrats are all over the place when it comes to immigration reform.



However, the Republicans have more or less a general consensus on how to handle immigration. I found it interesting that the RNC actually does not even have immigration listed as an core issue. It's actually considered a part of national security. Many Republican leaders such as Rick Santorum (featured on the Hannity and Colmes show), advocate 'security first' - that is, building up walls on our borders then dealing with amnesty.

These 'walls' are being touted as to keep our enemies such as Al-Qaeda out. However, we all know their real purpose...to keep illegal immigrants out.

Nah...I'm sure 20 million illegal immigrants won't have any impact on tax and social program reform...

My opinion? We don't need to live in East Berlin. If a terrorist wishes to enter our country, he/she is going to do it. Our borders are FAR too large (Canada as well) to justify the enormous monetary and personnel expense to keep everyone out (and if my some magic chance it does become effective - if you look towards the far future - maybe it could also keep us locked in...?)

But back to my main point, I consider it un-American to fence out the borders to the land of opportunity. Yes, the problem with 12+ million undocumented workers IS a serious issue. However, the reason for them coming up here has a lot to do with the political and economic instability in their own countries. Proper policy changes implemented in other countries (and we can help with those policies) is the only long-term solution.

So alas, immigration reform isn't happening anytime soon. We don't seem to want it. Watch these deficits and spending though...when we realize we don't have enough people paying into our system, I can bet one place where we're certainly going to look.