WTF is vague about crime of violence”
Well, for starters, burglary is not inherently a crime of violence. The government tried to make the argument that this statute was vague enough to allow the agency to define certain crimes including burglary as “violent” regardless of any likelihood of violence or actual violence involved. The Court determined that if the statue was vague enough to be defined that arbitrarily, then it was too vague to be enforceable. Which is almost certainly what Scalia would have decided. Congress can easily rewrite the law to make it more specific. The agency could have just as easily tried to deport the guy under another statute, they could have accused him of a crime of moral turpitude and achieved the same outcome under the same facts. Having conservatives on the court doesn’t mean the courts will back whatever outcomes seem the most conservative. It’s not their job to back the government on policy issues.
An invasion by a foreigner looting our country should not be a matter of civil law but a military matter. This is where is whole thing is going wrong. There is no limited government or representativeness or legal bagging limits of police that apply in this case.
It is a matter of national self defense, not a matter of limited governance of own people.
the court has completely erred and the liberals on the court perfectly jnow that, because to the Keagan et al, being a conservative coming to a liberal America is a crime of violence.