Posted on 07/10/2007 8:48:13 PM PDT by republicpictures
In a bizarre twist to a dispute over a four-foot-high fence near the U.S.-Canada border in Whatcom County, President Bush on Tuesday fired Dennis Schornack as U.S. Commissioner to the International Boundary Commission and member of the International Joint Commission.
"I would like to extend my best wishes in your future endeavors," wrote presidential assistant Liza Wright in conveying Bush's order. The letter told Schornack that he is "terminated effectively immediately."
The firing came without warning. The legal counsel to the International Boundary Commission described Bush's order as improper. He argued that Schornack holds a quasi-judicial position with an international body.
"First of all, he can't fire him: He can appoint him but he can't fire him," said Elliot Feldman, the IBC's legal counsel.
Schornack was in Michigan and not available for comment. But Feldman had plenty to say when interviewed by the P-I.
"The President has a fight on his hands," he said. "There has been quite a lot of threats and bullying to the commissioner. We thought it was all rather hollow."
The IBC and IJC are low-key bodies, composed of commissioners appointed by the U.S. and Canadian governments.
They are charged with overseeing the world's longest peaceful border, and working out trans-boundary disputes between the two countries.
They're best known for midwifing settlement of a longstanding dispute between the city of Seattle and British Columbia over the raising of Ross Dam, and for intervening when the pollution from the Trail Smelter in B.C. killed trees on the U.S. side of the border.
But Schornack appears to have run afoul of a powerful right-wing legal group with deep, longstanding ties to the Republican Party.
Herbert and Shirley-Ann Leo of Blaine, who live just south of the border, built on their property a four-foot-high, 85-foot-long concrete wall. The wall intrudes into a 10-foot-wide "clear boundary vista" maintained at the 5,000-mile-long border.
The boundary vista area has been maintained for a hundred years, but has assumed additional importance due to an upsurge of smuggling of illegals and "B.C. Bud" marijuana across the border.
According to the commission, the wall was "severely hampering the ability of the U.S. Border Patrol and Royal Canadian Mounted Police to protect the border." The IBC asked the Leus to remove the wall.
The couple refused, and have received assistance from the conservative Pacific Legal Foundation on grounds their private property rights have been violated.
After being refused legal help by the U.S. Department of State, the Commission retained private legal counsel, which filed papers in the case in Seattle defending the Commission's right to protect the border.
At that point, however, a dispute broke out between agencies.
The U.S. Justice Department asked to take over the case, and negotiate a compromise that concedes the couple's private property complaints. But the Commission argued that it is an international body.
In its defense, the IBC said in a statement: "Sooner rather than later, the Administration will be seen to prefer private property rights over national security and ready to undo an international treaty with Canada to serve that preference."
Schornack has impeccable Republican credentials. He was a longtime aide to Michigan's longtime (1990-2002) Republican Gov. John Engler. But he became outspoken in the case of the four-foot border fence.
"We are not interested in taking the Leus' property," Schornack said. "We are only interested in keeping permanent obstructions, such as walls, away from the border site lines, a mere 10 feet."
The Treaty of Washington between the U.S. and Canada directs the Commission to keep the boundary vista clear. The 1925 treaty was ratified by Congress, making it a law of the United States.
The Commission offered to remove the Leus' wall at its own expense.
Feldman said he believes the Department of Justice and White House made a backstage deal with the Pacific Legal Foundation.
"We believe they have made a deal and are selling out the national security of the United States," he argued. "We know there is someone in the White House who went there from the Justice Department. This has all the same features and it involves the same people as the firing of the U.S. attorneys."
The Justice Department could not be reached for comment.
----------------
BUMP
Dennis L. Schornack, Chairman, United States Section
Dennis L. Schornack, Chairman, United States Section
Dennis L. Schornack was appointed to chair the U.S. Section of the International Joint Commission by President George W. Bush and assumed office on April 8, 2002. At the same time, Mr. Schornack was appointed as U.S. Section Commissioner to the International Boundary Commission.
BORDER DISPUTE
Agency moves to dismiss property claim
U.S.-Canada boundary commission says Washington couple’s retaining wall threatens national security
JANE ARMSTRONG
July 6, 2007
VANCOUVER — The international boundary agency that acts as the caretaker of the Canada-U.S. border has moved to dismiss a first-of-its-kind lawsuit from a retired Washington couple who say the agency is trying to steal their property.
Herbert and Shirley-Ann Leu sued the International Boundary Commission in the spring after they were warned by the agency to remove a retaining wall on their Blaine, Wash., property.
The Leus argued that the wall was needed to prevent their backyard from sliding into a ditch.
But the commission, which acts as a caretaker of the 8,891- kilometre border, argued the Leu’s 1.2-metre-tall retaining wall violates a treaty that calls for 3.3-metre (10-foot) “vistas” on either side of the border.
But the Leus balked and turned to the Pacific Legal Foundation for help.
The legal group filed a suit in April against the commission, the first brought against the agency. The couple alleges the order to remove the wall infringes on their constitutional property rights.
This week, boundary commission lawyers in Seattle filed a motion to have that suit dismissed.
In a statement, the boundary commission said the so-called vistas are needed to maintain national security. Obstructions, such as walls, can provide cover for smugglers, aliens and terrorists, the agency’s commissioner, Dennis Schornack, said in a statement.
“The wall affords border runners, drug smugglers and terrorists a place to hide in making their way into the United States,” Mr. Schornack said.
In the past, residents have built structures within the 6.6-metre vista on either side of the border, Mr. Schornack said.
But “virtually every citizen co-operated by voluntarily removing the obstruction when notified by the commission,” he added.
“We have rarely had a problem,” he said.
“Everyone understands what it means to keep a border clear and visible and 10 feet from the border is not too much to ask.”
The boundary commission’s lawyer Elliot Feldman said a hearing is scheduled in Seattle on July 27.
Saturday, July 7, 2007, page A2
CORRECTION
No date has been set for a hearing on a motion to dismiss a lawsuit against the International Boundary Commission. An article in Friday’s Globe and Mail mistakenly said it was scheduled for July 27 in Seattle.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20070706.BCBORDER06/TPStory/National
” Canada and Mexico are now the two largest exporters of oil, natural gas, and electricity to the United States. Since 9/11, we are not only one another’s major commercial partners, we are joined in an effort to make North America less vulnerable to terrorist attack.”
Open Borders” are Secure Borders. Ask El Presedente Boosh.
Got Soma?
Yes, Libroids, that IS a literary reference.
Bump.
But the commission, which acts as a caretaker of the 8,891- kilometre border, argued the Leu’s 1.2-metre-tall retaining wall violates a treaty that calls for 3.3-metre (10-foot) “vistas” on either side of the border.
Some people just need firing.
LOL!
We need people like you walking point in our battle against the federal fascists attacking our private property rights.
Hence, Canada and Mexico together receive 37.2% of our total exports and we receive 28% of our total imports from them.
From the perspective of Canada, they send 85.1% of their total exports to the US and import 58.9% of their goods from us. From the perspective of Mexico, they send 87.5% of their exports to the US and import 56.3% of their goods from us. It is fairly obvious that the economies of both countries are very dependent upon the US and vice-versa.
seriously? that is pretty rough
if they built the wall slightly differently, it wouldn’t violate an international treaty
exactly. these restrictions were there when they purchased the land and should be clearly described on their deed
this would happen if a neighbor, or a utility or anyone else had obtained an easement, prior to the deed. they simply have no legal right to put up a fence there
I suspect that's one that got buried by the media.
The Trail Smelter case was back in the 1930's - the first big international environmental law case. It certainly was considered a big deal at the time and had a lot to do with the formulation of air pollution treaties between the U.S. and Canada.
--
"Trail, British Columbia was home to the largest lead and zinc smelting complex in the British Empire. Its 400-foot high stacks sent plumes of noxious smoke down the Columbia River valley. Upon crossing the United States - Canadian border, the smoke caused damage to crops and forests in Washington State. American farmers and the Canadian Company locked horns over compensation for crop losses and measures to ensure smoke reduction.
From this relatively unremarkable, private-law beginning, the dispute quickly escalated to become an international conflict involving the highest levels of the United States and Canadian governments. The dispute raised thorny issues of how international law should respond to transboundary air pollution. It took almost 15 years and two precedent-setting decisions from an international arbitration tribunal to finally settle these questions. Today, the Trail Smelter Arbitration is celebrated as the first international ruling on transborder air pollution, having established the "polluter pays" principle as the basis for resolving transboundary environmental disputes and remains one of the key underpinnings of international environmental law."
- from here
Thanks for the background on the Trail smelter story.
It sounds like it was killing off life like the zinc smelter that
operated in Blackwell, OK when I was a kid.
It’s a retaining wall, barely deeper than a yard stick. It’s necessary to prevent their land from sliding off into a ditch. If the border patrol are too short to look over a three or four foot retaining wall, maybe they should get taller border patrol agents.
seriously? that is pretty rough
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yep,,,in the 60’s,,,1500 miles or so,,,
Farmland in the USA...
The DMZ in Korea,,,Nam,,,
If you search > Agent Orange < a very long list comes up...
Trade with Canada and Mexico is good. Attempting to integrate either nation into America is beyond bad.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.