I sent to Thomas Lifson, editor of the American Thinker, my post, No Civilized Country Would Ever Banish Eduardo Saverin, before obtaining an important law article which would have greatly buttressed the argument that banishment is cruel and unusual punishment. More on that in in a moment (see lower). I want first to respond to two major objections that I have seen to the article. Curiously, no one has argued that exile is not cruel punishment. But two other arguments have come to the fore which merit consider.
Professor of law Richard Samuelson over at the Library of Liberty and Law points out a striking difference between Senator Chuck Schumer’s attitude toward the private property of dissidents and that of the “Father of our Country”. When some members of the population seemed to prefer the protection of the British rather than the freedom of the new country and were thinking of leaving:
“General Washington did not demand that such enemies of their native country, as he thought them, should pay an exit tax. The Americans were fighting to protect their property from arbitrary taxation. Loyalists were free to choose loyalty, and they were free to take their personal property with them. If there was, on principle, no exit tax demanded in the darkest days of the American revolution, it is hard to see how one could be justified now.”
The GPO has just published the full text of Schumer’s proposed Ex-PATRIOT Act (S. 3205). The act creates the new category of “specified expatriates” (a subset of 877A(g)(1)’s “covered expatriates”) and gives rules for determining who is a “specified expatriate”. It then imposes a tax of 30% on U.S. capital gains of “specified expatriates”, and makes them inadmissible to the United States. Continue reading