Comment Re: Consequences (Score 1) 168
This would be issuance of a passport pursuant to rendering him to arrest, to permit him to legally enter the US under custody. And quite within the powers of the government to do.
If he has a passport, he can go where ever the hell he wants - for example, to finish his long-delayed trip to South America. That's kinda/sorta the entire purpose of a passport. If it's just a matter of giving himself up, all he needs to do is show up at the American Embassy.
In law, rendition is a "surrender" or "handing over" of persons or property, particularly from one jurisdiction to another. For criminal suspects, extradition is the most common type of rendition. Rendition can also be seen as the act of handing over, after the request for extradition has taken place.
Read your own quote. Traveling OF HIS OWN FREE WILL to the US, to face charges or for any other reason, is not rendition.
Also from Wikipedia, the disambiguation page:
Rendition (law), a legal term meaning "handing over"
If he's traveling OF HIS OWN FREE WILL, he is not being "handed over". He's surrendering. Different thing.
Extraordinary rendition, the apprehension and extrajudicial transfer of a person from one nation to another
Again - if traveling OF HIS OWN FREE WILL, there is no "apprehension" involved, and is not an extrajudicial transfer.
You see, you're missing something very basic. If he's been arrested ("apprehended"), he DOESN'T NEED A PASSPORT. If it's an "extraordinary rendition" (read illegal, read kidnapping), HE DOESN'T NEED A PASSPORT.
Any conversation that involves "get a passport and come back to face the consequences" is a non-starter - he HAD a passport, and the US government revoked it. It's on THEM, not him; they are the ones that caused the problem in the first place - THEY are the ones that removed that option from the table, no Snowden.