Over 130,000 people signed the White House petition asking for the “Release of U.S.M.C. Sgt. [Andrew] Tahmooressi Suffering with PTSD from Mexico Imprisonment.” Tahmooressi was jailed by Mexican authorities when he accidentally crossed the border with three firearms in his vehicle. The White House responded, saying it would “respect the rule of law” in Tahmooressi’s plight. “We will continue to monitor the case and work with the Mexican authorities as this case proceeds through the Mexican judicial system,” said the statement from the Obama administration. “We continue to urge the Mexican authorities to process this case expeditiously.” When we use the phrase “Rule of Law,” we mean all citizens are treated fairly and the power of the government is restrained. In this instance, the White House is using Rule of Law to say its hands are tied. Based off the history of Rule of Law, we have two questions for the Obama administration (ignoring Obama’s own violations of Rule of Law): First, could Tahmooressi be ruled under a law he had no knowledge about? He did not realize he strayed into Mexican soil. Second, could Mexico’s law be a violation of Rule of Law, common law’s guarantee to self-defense?