- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
If I understand correctly, a court ruled that Elian Gonzalez had to remain in the U.S. pending an asylum hearing. The government tried to have the American relatives return Elian to his father voluntarily, but they refused to do so. (Note: I believe the father was in the U.S. at this point.) While negotiations were ongoing, a Florida family court judge revoked Elian's great-uncle's temporary custody. I'm assuming that once his great-uncle's custody was revoked, it reverted to his father. Essentially, that decision cleared the way for the government to remove Elian from the house because they were, in effect, returning Elian to the rightful custody of his father.
I don't see how the government violated the first court order because they did not remove Elian from the United States.* It was only after the Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of a ruling by the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which stated that Elian was too young to file for asylum on his own behalf and that his American relatives lacked legal standing, that Elian returned to Cuba.
I have no idea what Holden had to do with any of this.
*Disclaimer. I am not a lawyer and I did not stay at a Holiday Express last night.
