Posted on 04/18/2018 8:53:17 PM PDT by conservative98
No one seems to be listening to Daniel Horowitz who explained to Mark Levin the wrongheadedness of the Gorsuch decision. Which is predicated on the erroneous assumption that deportation is "punishment" and therefore the "law" needs to be specific as to when and where it can be applied so therefore it is "vague" as presently written. This is false reasoning. The law is NOT poorly written.
This jurisprudential "shift" provides illegals and the legal industry supporting them enormous new rights under "due process" which applies to CRIMINAL law--but NOT to IMMIGRATION law.
Deportation is NOT a punishment. Deportation is an EXTENSION OF SOVEREIGNTY, the constitutional right of a people to determine for themselves who they are and who can enter the country, who can stay and who must go.
Gorsuch opened a terrible can of worms by in essence requiring the criminalization of immigration statutes, which were never intended to be subject to due process requirements.
And that is very dangerous for American citizens because it conveys to non-citizen aliens immediate due process rights in immigration law which the constitution never intended them to possess. This is a very dangerous transmutation of intent and power in America--or what is left of it.
“The law is vague and Gorsuch came down on the side of the individual and against the government.”
He came down on the side of giving illegal aliens, criminal invaders, due process rights.
Like Jeff Sessions, there is no defending this rat bastard.
What the hell is wrong with you people?
As I told Impy, I don't think this ruling is nearly as bad as Obamacare -- HOWEVER, I am seeing a similar level of spin the way numerous FReepers tried to defend Roberts' Obamacare decision at the time and claim it was really a GOOD thing and that he had "embarrassed Obama by forcing him to admit its a tax" and how he "sent it back to Congress to tell them how to do their job right" and how it would "make Obama a one term president as long as the mandate is still in effect on election day"
There just seems to be a desire on "our side" to defend "our guys" at all costs and try to spin the hell out of awful decisions they make so we can justify that they were still the "right person" for the job.
You saw the same spin when Rand Paul supported amnesty, Sarah Palin supported a RAT backed candidate for Alaska Governor, Fred Thompson supported the unconstitutional "Popular Vote Compact" to go around the electoral college with the popular vote, Justin Amash voted in favor of HAMAS, etc... "gosh, they're only taking that position cuz they HAVE TO for Constitutional reasons!"
The sad thing is that if Gorsuch sided with the four Democrat judges tomorrow and issued some insane ruling like 5 year olds have a "right" to taxpayer funded transgender surgery, some on FR would be out in force to claim that Gorsuch only voted that way because the constitution REQUIRES five year olds to get transgender surgery, and he has to follow an "textual approach" and do what the constitution tells him to.
“He is saying that deportation is now a criminal punishment that requires all forms of due process.”
Exactly. There is no defending this rat bastard. Staggering the treachery we are witnessing...
“Somebody comes into the country illegally”
The individual is not an illegal alien.
He is a legal alien (green card holder) who was convicted of burglary.
He should go to jail, not be deported. Deport him and he’ll come back illegally.
I side with Gorsuch on this one. Levin, as usual, is dead wrong.
“giving illegal aliens”
The man is not an illegal alien.
You accuse Gorsuch of treason and you are not familiar with basic facts about the case. Go take a nap.
Make the law clearer.
Gorsuch is dead wrong. His rumpswabs are pathetic.
Foreign residents do not and should not enjoy the constutional rights guaranteed by the US constitution.
Gorusch went along with the courts liberals in drastically expanding legal rights for foreign nationals.
Expect the 9th circus to use this for their own ridiculous activism.
“The man is not an illegal alien.”
Criminal alien, criminal foreign national, illegal alien...What’s the f..ing difference. This is an immigration issue not a criminal law matter.
Why was the court involved in this matter in the first place?
I will take your word for it that he has a Green Card.
In that case, his “legal” status is probationary, and his presence in the USA is monitored, evaluated, and supervised by the Department of Homeland Security.
This individual is being deported because he has violated “Immigration Law.”
Until Gorsuch’s Leftist treachery, there were two centuries of “settled law” that said violators of Immigration Law are not entitled to due process.
If we gave a referendum to the entire country
“SHOULD OUR COUNTRY HAVE BORDERS AT ALL?”
I fear what the vote would be.
We have lost all common sense even on the Supreme Court.
To: dirtboy
A Constitutionalist judge will sometimes return a ruling we don’t like politically, such as in this case when the law is poorly written.
No one seems to be listening to Daniel Horowitz who explained to Mark Levin the wrongheadedness of the Gorsuch decision. Which is predicated on the erroneous assumption that deportation is “punishment” and therefore the “law” needs to be specific as to when and where it can be applied so therefore it is “vague” as presently written. This is false reasoning. The law is NOT poorly written.
This jurisprudential “shift” provides illegals and the legal industry supporting them enormous new rights under “due process” which applies to CRIMINAL law—but NOT to IMMIGRATION law.
Deportation is NOT a punishment. Deportation is an EXTENSION OF SOVEREIGNTY, the constitutional right of a people to determine for themselves who they are and who can enter the country, who can stay and who must go.
Gorsuch opened a terrible can of worms by in essence requiring the criminalization of immigration statutes, which were never intended to be subject to due process requirements.
And that is very dangerous for American citizens because it conveys to non-citizen aliens immediate due process rights in immigration law which the constitution never intended them to possess. This is a very dangerous transmutation of intent and power in America—or what is left of it.
41 posted on 4/19/2018, 1:21:32 AM by 4Runner
just remember, the government is made up of three, equal, powers. The Supremes are 1/3 of that. IN other words, they can be overridden by act of Congress backed by the President. 2/3 beats 1/3. It is a mistake to believe that the Supremes are the final, no arguments left, word. They aren’t.
Lol.. truth hurts.
Emotional ovveraction and pompous pronouncements of “betrayal” is what the right does best.
This guy can make dozens of rulings they like, but make one they dont, and you get this embarrassing display.
One of the reasons why conservatives decide to be pundits rather than run for office. Because no matter what, you will have 100000 people making all manner of wide-eyed hysterical statements of conspiracy about you the moment you do something they dont see eye-to-eye on.
These idiots act like this is the first ruling he’s ever made on SCOTUS. I guess as long as you are just a damn rubber stamp, then you are A-OK.
...”Scalia had the same opinion as Gorsuch in this case. It was a vague law.”...
Then,Congress needs to change that law.
ping
The swamp blackmailed him? Perhaps something on tape was told to him? It worked on Roberts.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.