Posted on 03/19/2019 7:26:46 AM PDT by CFW
In these cases, the Ninth Circuit had held that a provision requiring the mandatory detention of non-citizens who have committed certain dangerous crimes applies only if a non-citizen is arrested by immigration officials as soon as he is released from jail. The Supreme Court rejects this interpretation.
The Ninth Circuit is reversed and the case is remanded.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/16-1363_a86c.pdf
sounds good, hope it actually is able to help for the good of our country.
The Ninth Circuit is reversed and the case is remanded.
...
If we’ve seen that statement once, we’ve seen it a million times.
Looks like the 4 commies dissented.
Justice Thomas didn’t descent, but he issued a separate opinion that he would have found the entire case to be moot and would have dismissed the case entirely.
Reading Scotusblog, this is a reversal of a prior SCOTUS decision from the court under Kennedy.
The Ninth Circuit is reversed.........................of course it is. It’s in SF.................
Every bit of push back helps. From the decision:
Aliens who are arrested because they are believed to be
deportable may generally apply for release on bond or
parole while the question of their removal is being decided. These aliens may secure their release by proving to the satisfaction of a Department of Homeland Security
officer or an immigration judge that they would not endanger others and would not flee if released from custody.
Congress has decided, however, that this procedure is
too risky in some instances. Congress therefore adopted a
special rule for aliens who have committed certain dangerous crimes and those who have connections to terrorism. Under a statutory provision enacted in 1996, 110 Stat. 3009–585, 8 U. S. C. §1226(c), these aliens must be arrested “when [they are] released” from custody on criminal charges and (with one narrow exception not involved in these cases) must be detained without a bond hearing until the question of their removal is resolved.
In these cases, the United States Court of Appeals for
the Ninth Circuit held that this mandatory-detention
requirement applies only if a covered alien is arrested by
immigration officials as soon as he is released from jail. If the alien evades arrest for some short period of time—
according to respondents, even 24 hours is too long—the
mandatory-detention requirement is inapplicable, and the
alien must have an opportunity to apply for release on
bond or parole. Four other Circuits have rejected this
interpretation of the statute, and we agree that the Ninth
Circuit’s interpretation is wrong. We therefore reverse the judgments below and remand for further proceedings.
Roberts voted against the leftists this time. Will he do the same when Trump’s ED for The Wall comes up?
And shouldn’t they agree to not commit further crimes and illegal action—working illegally, identity theft, etc.? Seems like if they get released and go to work illegally the next day, they should be arrested immediately, along with their traitorous employer.
Four other Circuits have rejected this
interpretation of the statute, and we agree that the Ninth
Circuit’s interpretation is wrong. We therefore reverse the judgments below and remand for further proceedings.
...
That’s a tremendous slam. There shouldn’t have been any dissent at all.
( Far better topic title would be great)
U.S. Supreme Court gives Trump victory on immigration detention
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Supreme Court on Tuesday endorsed U.S. government authority to detain immigrants awaiting deportation anytime - potentially even years - after they have completed prison terms for criminal convictions, handing President Donald Trump a victory as he pursues hardline immigration policies.
The court ruled 5-4, with its conservative justices in the majority and its liberal justices dissenting, that federal authorities could pick up such immigrants and place them into indefinite detention at any time, not just immediately after they finish their prison sentence
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-immigration-idUSKCN1R01TF
I would really like to hear one of the ‘Conservative’ Justices confirm that Ginsberg is in attendance. I want to know that she is coherent and voting herself.
The DemocRATS are upset that they won’t have Dangerous Criminal Illegal Aliens to Vote for Them. Boo Hoo!
she was there for case on VA House of Delegates yesterday
I think this is a big deal. It said, if I am reading this right, that a criminal legal immigrant can be arrested, jailed, and deported years after their initial crime. Good news. Now, can we see the roundup? We need to deport criminal legal immigrants just as much as we do illegal aliens, H1B, and their families.
How do you know?
Listen to the court audio. She’s there asking questions.
Here is one from last week.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/audio/2018/17-1717
She’s there. Wish she wasn’t, but she is.
the report has her asking a question.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2018/18-281_197d.pdf
...and is split asunder and spread to the 4 quarters east of highway 35.
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.