In a stunning display of both historical ignorance and contemporary cruelty, Donald McShitMyPants Trump has proposed what amounts to a 21st-century version of penal colonies, suggesting the United States could pay foreign countries a "small fee" to imprison American repeat offenders. This batshit proposal, delivered at a House Republicans conference in Miami, represents yet another dangerous step toward authoritarian governance and a complete dismissal of human rights.

"If they've been arrested many, many times, they're repeat offenders by many numbers, I want them out of our country," Trump declared, before suggesting we could get them "the hell out of our country" and have them "maintained by others for a very small fee." This isn't just bad policy – it's a fucking nightmare straight out of a dystopian novel.

The sheer audacity of proposing to outsource incarceration to foreign nations demonstrates not just a fundamental misunderstanding of constitutional law and human rights, but a willingness to embrace colonial-era practices that civilized nations abandoned centuries ago.

The historical parallels are both obvious and damning. Britain's practice of shipping convicts to American colonies in the 18th century, and later to Australia, represents one of the darker chapters of colonial history. Trump's proposal essentially suggests we resurrect this barbaric practice, apparently having learned absolutely nothing from centuries of human rights progress.

The proposal faces numerous constitutional hurdles that make it dead on arrival from a legal standpoint:

The Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment ( which Donald Trump himself deserves ), would certainly apply to shipping American citizens to foreign prisons. The idea that we would deliberately subject U.S. citizens to foreign prison conditions, potentially in countries with significantly lower human rights standards, is legally indefensible.

Due process rights under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments would be severely compromised. How would prisoners maintain access to legal representation? How would they exercise their right to appeal? These fundamental constitutional protections can't simply be outsourced to the lowest bidder.

Trump's attempt to frame this as a cost-saving measure is laughably shortsighted. While he complains about the "massive amounts of money" spent on U.S. jails and private prisons, he conveniently ignores several critical factors:

The diplomatic costs of negotiating and maintaining such arrangements with foreign nations would be astronomical. The idea that countries would accept American prisoners for a "small fee" is naive at best and deliberately misleading at worst.

The legal costs of defending such a system against inevitable constitutional challenges would likely dwarf any theoretical savings.

The human rights implications of this proposal are staggering. We're talking about deliberately subjecting American citizens to foreign prison systems, potentially in countries with significantly worse human rights records than the United States. This isn't just cruel – it's a fundamental abdication of governmental responsibility.

The creation of Trump's "Department of Government Efficiency," led by Elon Musk, provides crucial context for this proposal. The department's boasted savings of $560 million through program slashing reveals the true nature of this administration's approach: slash-and-burn cost-cutting with zero regard for human consequences.

The timing of this proposal, amid aggressive deportation efforts and threats of trade sanctions against countries like Colombia, reveals its true nature. This isn't about cost savings or criminal justice reform – it's about expanding the tools of authoritarian control and punishment.

Trump's criticism of private prisons as charging "a fortune" is particularly rich given his administration's previous support for private detention facilities. This sudden concern for prison costs seems less about fiscal responsibility and more about finding new ways to implement cruel policies under the guise of efficiency.

The diplomatic implications of such a proposal are severe. Attempting to bribe or coerce other nations into housing American prisoners would damage international relationships and potentially violate numerous international treaties and agreements.

The response to this proposal must be unequivocal rejection coupled with genuine criminal justice reform efforts. Rather than shipping prisoners overseas, we should focus on:

Trump's penal colony proposal represents more than just bad policy – it's a dangerous step backward toward colonial-era barbarism. This isn't just an attack on criminal justice reform; it's an assault on basic human dignity and constitutional rights.

The fact that this proposal was made in front of House Republicans, presumably as a serious policy suggestion, should serve as a warning about the direction of American justice under potential future Trump leadership. This isn't just about opposing one bad idea – it's about preventing a fundamental transformation of American justice into something that would make even the founders of our penal system cringe.