Would it be considered treason to help plan the movement of a migrant caravan to the border?
<p>Stefan Molyneaux, <a href="https://twitter.com/StefanMolyneux/status/1054910029042671617" rel="noreferrer">on Twitter</a>, said:</p>

<blockquote>If even one American is found to be one of the forces behind the Honduran ‘caravan,’ that’s straight up treason.</blockquote>

<p>He is referring to the migrant caravan that originated in Honduras and that is currently on its way to the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/18/world/americas/trump-migrant-caravan.html" rel="noreferrer">United States border</a>. </p>

<p>Now, I know that Molyneaux is not a law expert and that he was not educated in the legal profession. I also know that Molyneaux is intending to be provocative and probably doesn't care much whether what he says has any legal logic. (On a personal note: I think that most of what Molyneaux says is nonsense) Despite all of this, what he said still made me wonder if there is any merit to his claim. </p>

<p>According to <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii" rel="noreferrer">Article III, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution</a>:</p>

<blockquote>Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.
<br>
<br>
The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.</blockquote>

<p>Would helping to plan the caravan be "..adhering to [the United States's] enemies, giving them aid and comfort"? Under Article III, Section 3, could the act of aiding the caravan be considered treason?</p>

<p>Reading some background on <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Molyneux" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Stefan Molyneux (Wikipedia)</a> would indicate that he is a (Canadian) right-wing <a href="https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/provocateur" rel="nofollow noreferrer">provocateur (Merriam-Webster)</a> and there is no legal logic to his claim that anyone involved with the migrant caravan - either as a refugee or a person giving aid - is committing an act of treason.</p>

<p>Provocateurs - on the political left or right - seek to incite arguments and/or movements on social or political issues with emotion and not on legal frameworks or logical discussion. Provocateurs use words and phrases that can be identified as <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog-whistle_politics" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Dog-whistles (Wikipedia)</a>. Calling out "treason" and accusing one of being a traitor are examples of dog whistles.</p>

<p>The legal reasoning <em>against</em> leveling calls of treason against anyone helping the caravan members are many; the migrants are not (from the U.S. Constitution:)</p>

<blockquote>
  <p><em>levying war against them (the US), or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort</em>....</p>
</blockquote>

<p>because:</p>

<p>• None of the countries of origin of the migrants are currently in armed conflict with the U.S.</p>

<p>• None of the migrants - alone or as a whole - are armed to engage the U.S. or are a threat to the U.S.</p>

<p>• The refugees are easily identified as economic migrants, political refugees or those fleeing violence (domestic, communal, sectarian).</p>

<p>• According to <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugee_law" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Refugee law (Wikipedia)</a> and US Federal law, migrants have a right to due process at the border.</p>

<p>• There is no clear proof of an ulterior motive or funding for the migrants in the the caravans.</p>

<p>There could be - now or in the future - Americans or American-based aid groups helping individuals or the group as a whole with necessities with food and safety while they travel or after they arrive at the border. But the fact remains that each migrant - when and if they reach the US border - will be legally assessed individually as a migrant or refugee. The aid they may have received is really no different than what many NGOs provide who help arrange a refugees' processing through legal immigration channels, in some instances in conjunction with a US Government agency or with an arm of the United Nations. Such aid by an American is not treasonous for the legal reasoning above.</p>

<p>According to <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/2204" rel="noreferrer">50 USC § 2204</a> [Title 50. War and National Defense]</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>"enemy of the United States" means any country, government, group, or person that has been engaged in hostilities, whether or not lawfully authorized, with the United States.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>This is not limited to nations, but it is limited to those activly engaged in the use of force against the US.</p>

us-constitution