Protestors in The Big, Rotten, Apple are protesting the arrest of the person who may be the world’s biggest and most successful drug dealer, Nicolas Maduro. The protestors are arguing, in essence, that because Maduro is a head of state, he deserves a special kind of immunity. When the United States Supreme Court granted a limited immunity to President Trump, based on 250 years of jurisprudence, the same protestors went berserk.

There should be no immunity for Nicolas Maduro or other supposed heads of state who obtained their position through a coup d’état, served at the behest of the international drug cartels, and oppressed their own people.

The United States has exercised extra judicial jurisdiction for almost the entirety of its existence. Not too long ago, I was involved as amicus curiae in a case before the United States Supreme Court. The issue was whether a statute passed by Congress could be utilized extraterritorially. The statute in question was the ATA, the Anti-Terrorism Act. The question presented to the U.S. Supreme Court was whether jurisdiction of the United States courts could extend to foreign entities causing harm to American citizens. The Court responded with a resounding “Yes” on that question. In the Opinion, the Court noted the lengthy history the United States has had in exercising its jurisdiction over criminals abroad.

We all know that President Biden, along with President Trump, put a price on the head of Nicolas Maduro. The despot Maduro was considered worse than a common criminal, a danger to American citizens, and a person worthy of being deposed and prosecuted. There is a criminal indictment pending against Maduro, and hence the United States had every right to bring him back to the United States for justice.

The second and third Presidents of the United States, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, did not hesitate to enforce U.S. law abroad in order to punish and destroy the Mohammedan Barbery Pirates. Taking hostages and demanding money for safe passage was the manner in which the Barbery Pirates operated. It was contrary to international law, and the United States would not stand for it.

Manuel Noriega was taken prison in January of 1990. The President of the United States was George H. W. Bush. The United States invaded Panama in Operation Just Cause. Noriega was a well-known drug trafficker.

Saddam Hussein, the Iraqi leader, was captured in December of 2003 following a United States led invasion. The history of United States action against its enemies goes back a long way. Emilio Aguinaldo, of the Philippines, was captured by the United Sates forces in 1901. This was during the Philippine-American War.

There are similarities and differences to all of these events.

The appropriate debate is whether the United States Supreme Court, over the centuries in which this country has been in existence, is correct to have permitted and given the stamp of approval to American exercise of extraterritorial jurisdiction. The answer, based upon Constitutional law, is in the affirmative. One can argue whether this law is just, fair, or sufficiently modern, but there is much precedent for what Donald Trump did when he seized the Venezuelan dictator drug dealer.

It goes without saying that those of Maduro’s ilk have been responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans as a result of the drug trade. The Venezuelan strongman is not alone. Mexican, Columbian, and Brazilian leaders have long profited from dealing in drugs.

I spoke with someone who lives abroad while writing this piece, and it was noted to me that the South American drug business fuels death and destruction around the world. The opium smugglers from China in the early part of the 19th Century, and for long prior to that, were responsible for the leadership crisis in that nation. The pre-communist Chinese rulers not only encouraged the opium trade but benefitted richly from it.

The Taliban in Afghanistan grow poppy for export, as do terrorist groups in Syria and other Middle Eastern Arab countries.

Americans, and Europeans, but particularly Americans have been ripe for the picking when it comes to the sale of drugs and other substances that kill, maim, and cause dependency.

Like or hate Donald Trump, he has taken decisive action against drug dealers and, as a result thereof, he will be responsible for saving the lives of tens of thousands and perhaps hundreds of thousands of American young people.

The debate about United States’ use of force in Latin America, or other places in the world, must be not about personalities but rather about the application of international law, and what means are necessary to protect American lives. Nicolas Madura, an indicted drug trafficker, was subject to arrest and incarceration to the extent that he could be reached. Fortunately, the United States effectuated the capture of Madura with no apparent loss of life.

Most of the approbation concerning the conduct of President Trump relates to his blunt statements on the advantages of obtaining Venezuelan oil for the United States while denying it to Cuba and China. The difference between Donald Trump and his predecessors, is that he is publicly honest when he would be better off keeping his mouth shut. United States police action overseas has frequently been accompanied by mixed motives, including those of a financial nature. Those on the left are not babes in the woods but rather answer to a different constituency.

Those protesting the conduct of President Trump either do not appreciate the reality of the international drug trade or simply do not care. Suddenly, the new Mayor of the City of New York, Zohran Mamdani, has become an international spokesperson for tyrannical regimes around the world. Mamdani is seeking publicity and power for himself by attempting to create the image that he is the anti-Trump. The newly installed mayor has no experience, competence, or moral pretense to oppose the President’s attempt to remove drugs from our streets, homes, and schools.

One does not have to like President Trump and may disagree with most or all of what he does, but as my Dad used to say, “Even a blind dog gets a bone once in a while.”

Donald Trump has proven himself much more than a blind dog, and we may very well look back on his presidency with a whimsical nod of respect. The President has taken on issues that other presidents have avoided or simply kicked down the road for someone else to worry about.

Now, Mr. President, let’s work on healthcare and other domestic issues also of importance to the American people.

Clifford A. Rieders is a board-certified trial advocate in Williamsport.