link?
ty
Don Jr., Mike Lee Tout Constitutional Use of “Privateers” to Put Down Cartels
by AWRAY January 28, 2025 in Borders, Immigration

Last Updated on January 28, 2025
Don Jr. shared an X post made by Utah Senator Mike Lee, proposing use of a long-forgotten constitutional provision that grants “reprisal” powers to citizens, against foreign enemies on Monday.
This legal clause, Lee argued, could serve as an answer to threats from Mexican cartels.
This provision, knowns as “letters of marque and reprisal”, allows the U.S. government to provide official government licenses that permit private citizens (privateers) to engage in actions typically seen as piracy, such as attacking enemy ships in times of war. Commonly used during the “Age of Sail”, these documents gave their civilian recipients legal permission to seize property from foreign vessels as a form of retaliation for hostile actions by other nations.
https://nationalfile.com/don-jr-mike-lee-tout-constitutional-use-of-privateers-to-put-down-cartels/
Lee’s original thread on X, laid out point by point, made the case for “letters of marque and reprisal” using constitutional and historical grounds.
1/ What Are Letters Of Marque And Reprisal And How Could They Be Used To Weaken Drug Cartels?
2/ Letters of marque and reprisal are government-issued commissions that authorize private citizens (privateers) to perform acts that would otherwise be considered piracy, like attacking enemy ships during wartime. Privateers are rewarded with a cut of the loot they “bring home”
3/ Legal Basis in the U.S. The U.S. Constitution authorizes these commissions in Article I, Section 8, giving Congress the power to “grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal” While Congress hasn’t issued one in over a century, the authority to do so still exists
4/ Modern Context: Mexican Drug Cartels Using letters of marque could be a novel, but effective response to unique threats posed by drug cartels—especially in response to threats by the cartels to target U.S. planes returning illegal immigrants to their countries of origin
5/ How Could They Be Applied? – Authorization: Congress could issue letters of marque and reprisal authorizing private security firms or specially trained civilians to intercept cartel operations, particularly those involving drug shipments or human trafficking across borders – Targets: Focus on disrupting supply lines, capturing high-value targets, or seizing assets like boats, vehicles, cash, gold, or equipment used in criminal activities
6/ Advantages – Flexibility: Private entities operate with more agility than the government, adapting quickly with the tactics of cartels – Cost: Would reduce the financial burden on taxpayers, as privateers receive only a cut of what they recover & return to the U.S.
7/ Criticism The use of letters of marque and reprisal would undoubtedly draw criticism, especially from those inclined to elevate abstract, often-inchoate principles of what they deem “international law” above the sovereign interests of the United States
8/ Dismissing the possible use of letters of marque to combat Mexican drug cartels—either on the basis of “international law” or otherwise—overlooks the clear and present threat posed by those cartels to the U.S. This could prove to be an effective alternative to war
9/ We have no desire to go to war with our southern neighbor But we also can’t ignore the fact that drug cartels are now threatening to target U.S. planes deporting illegal aliens That sounds like a great reason to consider issuing letters of marque and reprisal
10/ Letters of marque and reprisal have worked well for the U.S.—and countless other countries—in the past We’d be wrong not to consider using them against the cartels
11/ Please share if you like this idea—and follow if you’d like to see more posts about letters of marque and reprisal & other amazing, little-known features of the U.S. Constitution
Letters of Marque and Reprisal: An Introduction
By: Dave Benner|Published on: Apr 9, 2014
Several times during his tenure as a Congressman, Ron Paul suggested using letters of marque and reprisal to seize property and exact harm upon Osama bin Laden and other Al Qaeda officials. Offering a bill in October of 2001, Paul’s suggestion would have allowed:
“Congress to authorize the President to specifically target Bin Laden and his associates using non-government armed forces. Since it is nearly impossible for U.S. intelligence teams to get close to Bin Laden, the marque and reprisal approach creates an incentive for people in Afghanistan or elsewhere to turn him over to the [United States].”
Paul argued that the letters would be cost effective, produce motivation for locals to assist in capture, and protect liberty at home while hindering foes abroad.
He was mocked. He was ridiculed. He was criticized by those in his own party. His plan fell on deaf ears.
While commonly chided, Paul’s suggestion may very well have destroyed the political impetus behind the PATRIOT Act and blocked the emergence of the Department of Homeland Security. It very well may have worked to erode the military industrial complex.
How is that, you may ask?
Without wartime policy, these policies may never have been able to be effectively sold to the American public. Without perpetual war, there is usually little justification for a national government to deprive individuals of liberty.
In Article I, Section 8, the Constitution provides the following power to Congress:
“To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;”
The founders had the prophetic foresight to conclude that there may be times in which the United States wished to enact retribution against enemies without the necessity of waging a costly or expansive war. As many realized, war is a menace to individual liberty and a friend of an overreaching government.
During the Philadelphia summer of 1787, James Madison said that war “has the tendency to render the head too large for the body.” Madison concluded, “A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty.” Madison was not alone in this belief.
The argument of Madison and others illustrated the potential for letters of marque and reprisal to be used as an alternative. The letters themselves would allow for privateers (vessels which were equipped and commissioned by private individuals) to attack and capture enemy vessels, confiscate property, or engage in military hostilities. The letters served and a beneficial way to augment naval forces and produced positive results in the early stages of the republic.
Neither the Republicans nor the Federalists devoted much energy to attacking the policy of letters of marque and reprisal. Opponents of the Constitution did not fear their presence, understanding that it would be the power of Congress rather than the executive to propose them. In comparison to their tendency to believe that the executive would rule with unilateral war power, the letters seemed inconsequential. Supporters of the Constitution also understood their presence as a power. In The Federalist #41, Madison called the letters a “palpable necessity” and wrote that they provided “security against foreign danger.”[1]
Throughout the War of Independence, privateering created a major source of commerce and employment for many states. The practice proved significant, leading to the seizure of about 300 British ships during the war.
During the War of 1812, Madison used such letters to oppose the British, realizing that the United States lacked a sophisticated navy to oppose a world power.
Under the Constitution as ratified, the President was only to become the commander of the military in times where war was declared in the explicit by Congress. Understanding these premises, Alexander Hamilton made this clear in The Federalist #69:
“The President is to be commander-in-chief of the army and navy of the United States. In this respect his authority would be nominally the same with that of the king of Great Britain, but in substance much inferior to it. It would amount to nothing more than the supreme command and direction of the military and naval forces, as first General and admiral of the Confederacy; while that of the British king extends to the declaring of war and to the raising and regulating of fleets and armies — all which, by the Constitution under consideration, would appertain to the legislature.”[2]
This passage serves as farther proof that the President was to act in a conciliatory manner toward Congress, respecting the legislature as the body to make such regulations over wartime policy.
Unfortunately, these limitations on the President have been undermined by the War Powers Act and the incremental transferal of war powers to the executive during the 20th Century. These trends should be rejected outright. Allowing the President to unilaterally control all aspects of a war’s declaration, execution, and conclusion has degraded the original understanding of the Constitution. Utilizing letters of marque and reprisal would serve to threaten this negative development and reverse these harmful shifts.
Understanding letters and the separation of powers doctrine, the first executives were forced to abide by this explanation.
During the Quasi War, John Adams took no independent action to escalate hostilities against the French. Instead, Congress passed a series of acts and Adam complied with the statues that were passed. When Adams became lenient and diverted from these guidelines, he was reprimanded by the Supreme Court when he attempted seize a vessel sailing from a French port. Congress had only allowed him to act to seize ships heading to French ports.[3] The President was admonished.
In the same spirit, Thomas Jefferson acted in a characteristically deferential manner when dealing with Congress in relation to the First Barbary War. After approval was given by Congress to protect American ships and citizens against aggression, Jefferson announced that he was “unauthorized by the Constitution, without the sanction of Congress, to go beyond the line of defense.”[4] Evidently, Jefferson understood that the restrictions placed upon his power to conduct military hostilities were clearly defined during the Constitution’s ratification.
The founding generation and the first Presidents understood that unending war was the friend of tyranny rather than liberty. As such, they realized that letters of marque and reprisal would be an effective way to impede enemies and protect liberty at the same time. A massive amount of premonition went into these conclusions, and these perceptions made the states realize that the letters could be beneficial in a free society.
In today’s political environment, many are unaware of what letters of marque and reprisal are or why they were proposed. However, history is evidence to the fact that they served as an essential mechanism to avert war and punish adversaries in the absence of military aggression. Ron Paul realized that, and made an offering which would have preserved liberty and protected the states simultaneously.
Over 200 years since they were last used, the time is suitable for letters of marque and reprisal to find their way back into popular civic understanding. Our republic yearns for it, if only for the sake of liberty and fiscal advantages they offer.
[1] The Federalist #41, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, The Federalist, Edited by Jacob E. Cooke (Middletown: Wesleyan University, 1961), 268 -278.
[2] The Federalist #69, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, The Federalist, Edited by Jacob E. Cooke (Middletown: Wesleyan University, 1961), 465.
[3] Presidential War Powers: The Constitutional Answer, Tom Wood’s Liberty Classroom, March 31, 2014; available at http://www.libertyclassroom.com/warpowers/
[4] Ibid.
https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2014/04/09/letters-of-marque-and-reprisal-an-introduction/
Letter of marque
From wikilawschool.org. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
NamespacesPageDiscussionPage actionsReadEdit sourceHistory
A Letter of marque[1] is a government-issued commission that authorizes private citizens (privateers) to perform military acts in accordance with Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 War Powers giving Congress the power to "grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal"[2]
Referencesedit source
↑ https://x.com/BasedMikeLee/status/1883953109443174581/photo/1 has a sample image of one from 1812 from James Madison
↑ As publicized by Mike Lee in January 2025 https://x.com/BasedMikeLee/status/1883953165240037618.
https://www.wikilawschool.org/wiki/Letter_of_marque
Letters of Marque and Reprisal
Posted on January 28, 2025 by DRenegade
5/ How Could They Be Applied?
– Authorization: Congress could issue letters of marque and reprisal authorizing private security firms or specially trained civilians to intercept cartel operations, particularly those involving drug shipments or human trafficking across borders… pic.twitter.com/AxkAWKB17k
— Mike Lee (@BasedMikeLee) January 27, 2025
Subscribe to NC Renegade Posts via Email  Subscribe
 
https://ncrenegade.com/letters-of-marque-and-reprisal/
Musk and Don Trump Jr. express support for reviving letters of marque against cartels
By Brady Knox
January 28, 2025 12:17 pm
Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Donald Trump Jr. expressed support for reviving letters of marque and reprisals to combat drug cartels.
On Monday, Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) laid out a detailed plan to bring back the old tactic of privateering, in which the government would give private actors its blessing to raid enemy ships, taking part of the loot as payment. Though the practice was largely ended by the 1856 Paris Declaration Respecting Maritime Law after the Crimean War, Lee suggested reviving and modernizing it.
“Congress could issue letters of marque and reprisal authorizing private security firms or specially trained civilians to intercept cartel operations, particularly those involving drug shipments or human trafficking across borders,” Lee suggested after pointing out that the Constitution still gives it authority to issue the letters.
The privateers would “focus on disrupting supply lines, capturing high-value targets, or seizing assets like boats, vehicles, cash, gold, or equipment used in criminal activities.”
Lee argued that the move would allow more flexibility in combating threats from drug cartels and save taxpayer money. His proposal drew support from several of those close to President Donald Trump.
“If you’re looking for an effective, efficient, @DOGE-compliant way to combat Mexican drug cartels — especially those now threatening to target U.S. planes deporting illegal aliens — you will really like this thread proposing letters of marque and reprisal as a possible solution!” Trump Jr. said in a post on X, quoting Lee’s proposal.
IF YOU’RE LOOKING FOR AN EFFECTIVE, EFFICIENT, @DOGE-COMPLIANT WAY TO COMBAT MEXICAN DRUG CARTELS—ESPECIALLY THOSE NOW THREATENING TO TARGET U.S. PLANES DEPORTING ILLEGAL ALIENS—YOU WILL REALLY LIKE THIS THREAD PROPOSING LETTERS OF MARQUE AND REPRISAL AS A POSSIBLE SOLUTION! HTTPS://T.CO/M3OOEZ0KKZ
— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) January 27, 2025
“This would work very fast,” Musk said in an X post quoting the proposal.
THIS WOULD WORK VERY FAST HTTPS://T.CO/B9R7PPAVYI
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 28, 2025
Lee’s proposal largely drew praise and memes on social media, with many Trump supporters voicing their approval. Other critics were more skeptical, with some pointing out logistical problems with the plan.
“Letters of Marque and Reprisal were effective in the past because privateers could legally sell the ships and cargo they captured. The most valuable property that drug dealers own is drugs. Would the government let the privateers sell the drugs they capture?” the Cato Institute’s Alex Nowrasteh said.
The Daily Beast’s Janna Brancolini called the proposal “crazy.” She said the primary reason for letters of marque in the United States’s case was to compensate for the lack of a sizeable navy — in stark contrast to the military power the U.S. is today.
Monday wasn’t the first time Lee floated the idea — he first mentioned the power in a 2011 Conservative Political Action Conference speech. However, the speech was less a proposal than a history lesson.
He explained that letters of marque are “essentially a hall pass issued by Congress that entitles the bearer to act in the United States’s name and engage in state-sponsored acts of piracy on the high seas.”
“And so, help me, if it’s the last thing I do … I’m going to get a letter of marque of reprisal,” he said, drawing laughter. “I’m going to get a ship and an eyepatch, and I’m going to be a pirate, and you’re all invited to join me!”
Lee’s Monday proposal also resembles the more modern filibustering, in which people would gather private armies to invade Latin American countries with the intention of setting up their own governments, sometimes with the tacit blessing of the U.S. government.
The most successful, William Walker, conquered Nicaragua in 1856.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/3302650/musk-don-jr-express-support-reviving-letters-marque-cartels/
Letters Of Marque And Reprisal And How Could They Be Used To Weaken Drug Cartels?
BY HERSCHEL SMITH
2 days, 21 hours ago
Mike Lee.
1/ What Are Letters Of Marque And Reprisal And How Could They Be Used To Weaken Drug Cartels? pic.twitter.com/0EeQigzVYm
— Mike Lee (@BasedMikeLee) January 27, 2025
I think it’s a fine option, but David Codrea has some cautions. “Good luck getting business licenses and insurance, and then navigating your way through the government contracting/procurement process. And lawyers– don’t forget lots of lawyers.”
I’d go further than that. What are the rules for the use of force that must be followed? Rules of engagement? Will U.S. prosecutors come after men who take these actions? What if a U.S. citizen gets shot in the process? And on and on the questions could go.
U.S. Sovereignty
https://www.captainsjournal.com/2025/01/28/letters-of-marque-and-reprisal-and-how-could-they-be-used-to-weaken-drug-cartels/
Mike Lee Proposes Issuing Letters of Marque
LINCOLN BROWN | 12:44 PM ON JANUARY 28, 2025
Lee has proposed that the government return to issuing letters of marque. For those of you not versed in pirate lore (meaning anyone who does not have the same weird fascination with it as I do, which is likely everyone), a letter of marque was a document issued by a government to privateers to loot and plunder ships belonging to enemy nations. The crews or, more likely, the owners got a cut of the take. Many privateers also engaged in piracy, although one of the most famous pirates in history, Henry Morgan, despised being called a pirate and considered himself a one-time privateer and a loyal subject to the British crown.
The U.S. has used letters of marque in the past. Congress issued them to merchant ships during the American Revolution to harass and plunder enemy vessels, and lo and behold, they worked.
In a series of posts on X, Lee noted that, believe it or not, Congress still has that power under Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution. He argues that while we haven't used it in a while, it might be time to dust it off and leverage it against the drug cartels. He sees the move as a good one, given the threats by the cartels against the U.S. for returning criminals to their countries of origin.
Lee explained:
Using letters of marque could be a novel but effective response to unique threats posed by drug cartels—especially in response to threats by the cartels to target U.S. planes returning illegal immigrants to their countries of origin.
Congress could issue letters of marque and reprisal authorizing private security firms or specially trained civilians to intercept cartel operations, particularly those involving drug shipments or human trafficking across borders.
The focus would be on disrupting supply lines of trafficked drugs and people. Assets like boats, gold, cash, and equipment would be seized. Obviously, the government would handle any drugs involved and the trafficked persons.
Lee asserts that issuing letters of marque would be cheaper for the U.S. taxpayer and easier logistically since said privateers could respond to cartels with more agility and could adapt their tactics faster than government troops. He also commented that it would be a preferable alternative to going to war with our southern neighbors.
He also acknowledged that while the U.S. does not want to declare war, the threat posed by the cartels cannot be ignored. One responder on X raised a point: if a company or group has a letter of marque, what would prevent them from harassing or stealing from private citizens, innocent bystanders, or the victims themselves? Some vetting process would be necessary, and since Trump created the Space Force, perhaps he could create the U.S. Department of Privateering. That's a tough one since, traditionally, issuing letters of marque is a job for Congress. But then again, who wants The Squad raising a pirate army?
https://pjmedia.com/lincolnbrown/2025/01/28/mike-lee-proposes-issuing-letters-of-marque-n4936440
What is a Letter of Marque?
A letter of marque is a formal document which issued by a government to a citizen to allow him or her to seize goods or citizens of other nations. These letters have historically been used as political tools, both to allow people to deal with private disputes and to engage with another nation without openly declaring war. Some countries still allow letters of marque to be issued, although most do not use the privilege; in other nations, they are no longer legal. The United States is one nation in which they are permitted, under the terms of the Constitution.
Essentially, a letter of marque creates a legal pirate. A citizen with such a letter was historically allowed to outfit a ship for the purpose of piracy, taking that ship beyond national waters and attacking enemy shipping. Attacks on a nation's merchant marine can be very powerful politically, and the holder of the letter can sell any goods confiscated, while captured citizens could be used as sources of information or bargaining chips. One famous holder of a letter of marque was Sir Francis Drake, a British Vice Admiral who attacked Spanish shipping.
A ship outfitted under a letter of marque was sometimes known as a private man-o-war, in a reference to the fact that it was used to supplement a national navy. Such ships were also known slangily as privateers, as were their captains and crews. In France, where these letters were also known as lettres de course, these ships were called corsairs. Most nations discerned between privateers and pirates; as privateers operated with the legal blessings of their government.
Initially, letters of marque were designed to allow people to redress personal wrongs. Marque in Old French meant “seizure” or “reprisal.” For example, the property of a French merchant might be stolen in Italy, and the merchant would apply for a letter of marque which would allow him or her to intercept an Italian merchant's goods to make up for the loss. Many governments respected these letters because they wanted to be able to use them as tools themselves.
Over time, politicians began to realize the potential of a government warrant which would allow someone to confiscate goods from citizens of another nation. A ship using a letter of marque would be expected to outfit itself, and as a gesture of appreciation for the letter, it would surrender some of the confiscated goods to the government. Governments could therefore ensure that foreign shipping would be interrupted without having to bear the financial burden, and they would often come out ahead.
https://www.historicalindex.org/what-is-a-letter-of-marque.htm
>>22478031 lb
🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸
@mrddmia
🚨
Trump 47 Justice Department fires January 6th federal prosecutors in the DC U.S. Attorney’s office.
https://truthsocial.com/@mrddmia/posts/113925282611155645
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene
@RepMTG
The Biden regime tried to ‘Trump-proof’ the federal government by locking in never-ending remote work deals with unions to prevent federal workers from serving the American people.
Chairman James Comer and my brand-new DOGE subcommittee are investigating this coordinated sabotage operation between the Biden regime and the American Federation of Government Employees.
President Trump was elected to lead the federal government and is putting America First by demanding federal employees return to work!
Joe Biden is not the president anymore, and the days of America Last are over.
https://truthsocial.com/@RepMTG/posts/113925239411443627