Yes, and let me know when the President orders armed federal agents to launch a raid to seize your child for you. Won’t happen.
Actually,a federal appeals court had issued a ruling supportive of the family here. Clinton launched his raid instead.
This case involved more than just a dad seeking custody, because Cuba is a police state and the boy’s mom died escaping with him to the United States. There also was the issue of whether the dad was being threatened.
As for the weapons - Marisleysis was responsible for that, because she was on TV making threats about what might happen to anyone who came to get Elian. She's very lucky that she or one of the other residents or guests in her house didn't get shot, including Elian. I didn't like the guns - I think that was a bad move, but I also think that the Miami family took their protest too far and forced Clinton and Reno's hands. It reaches a point when the Attorney General of the United States is telling you that, absent a court ruling to the contrary, the boy will be returned to his father on a certain date, that you must come to grips with reality and give the boy back.
I found this interesting bit from a Time magazine piece on this topic. I don't care for Bill Clinton one bit, but he is smart, and he is right about the potential ramifications that could have occurred:
While in Miami last weekend, former President Bill Clinton, who occupied the White House in 2000, defended his decision to enforce the law and forcibly give Elián back to his dad. "If I had said, 'I don't like Cuba and I don't care what the international law is,'" Clinton said, "then not only me but no other American President would have been able to say with a straight face, 'You can't kidnap [American children] and keep [them]'" in other countries. The U.S., to cite just one example, would have had greatly diminished standing last year when it demanded that Brazil return nine-year-old Sean Goldman to his father in New Jersey (which it did, in time for Christmas).