Thank you for your good link work.
However, the Gouveia “Memorandum” of Ed Saur’s latest and current complaint.
Saur: 1) seeks Emergency behavior from the SC commiserate with what was submitted to them three weeks ago, in the form of an Emergency appeal; and
2) seeks relief from the Court “Stay”, causing Deportations to be halted, while the Court engages in its delay.
~~~
I think the American judicial system now plays, intentionally, fast and loose with the security of Americans, leaving no assurance that Courts can even be predictable any longer. That was seldom an issue in the past. Everyone was basically on the same side for good and against any unbridled wickedness.
Appreciate the link tracking very much.
in Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam, the Supreme Court in 2020 held that an alien detained shortly after entering the United States could not constitutionally challenge a federal statute limiting judicial review of his “expedited removal” proceedings (a streamlined removal process applicable to aliens apprehended at or near the border).16 Although the alien had physically entered the United States, the Court determined that he could be “’treated’ for due process purposes ‘as if stopped at the border’” because he was encountered only twenty-five yards inside the United States and essentially remained “on the threshold” of entry.17
104-208
, 110 Stat. 3009–546). According to the Court, the “century-old rule” that aliens seeking initial entry into the United States lack due process rights “would be meaningless if it became inoperative as soon as an arriving alien set foot on U.S. soil.” 18
The Court observed, moreover, that only aliens “who have established connections in this country” have due process protections in their removal proceedings.19
The Supreme Court’s jurisprudence indicates that, although aliens present within the United States generally have due process protections, the extent of those constitutional protections may depend on certain factors, including whether the alien has been lawfully admitted or developed ties to the United States, and whether the alien has engaged in specified criminal activity. Therefore, even with regard to aliens present within the United States, the Court has sometimes deferred to Congress’s policy judgments that limit the ability of some classes of aliens to contest their detention or removal.
No. The oral argument about to take place is about a stay preventing Trump from enforcing his Executive Order about birthright citizen.