PING!
Posted on 06/07/2021 8:26:26 AM PDT by jazusamo
On Monday, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected an illegal immigrant’s attempt to twist immigration law and create a loophole that would allow thousands of illegal immigrants to become lawful permanent residents. Democratic senators and attorneys general advocated for this loophole, but a liberal justice wrote the opinion for a unanimous Court.
“Petitioner Jose Santos Sanchez entered this country unlawfully from El Salvador. Years later, because of unsafe living conditions in that country, the Government granted him Temporary Protected Status (TPS), entitling him to stay and work in the United States for as long as those conditions persist. Sanchez now wishes to become a lawful permanent resident (LPR) of the United States. The question here is whether the conferral of TPS enables him to obtain LPR status despite his unlawful entry. We hold that it does not,” Associate Justice Elena Kagan, an Obama appointee, wrote in the opinion.
In Sanchez v. Mayorkas, Kagan noted that U.S. immigration law, “applied according to its plain terms, prevents Sanchez from becoming an LPR. There is no dispute that Sanchez ‘entered the United States in the late 1990s unlawfully, without inspection.'”
Yet Democrats and immigration activists twist the law to argue that if an illegal immigrant obtains temporary protected status due to violence or bad conditions in his or her home country, he or she can be considered “admitted” for the purposes of obtaining LPR status...
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
There is talk that even the SCOTUS Libs are anxious about the Dems threat to pack the Court and that accounts for a spate of 9-0 rulings.
You know you suck at law with a 9-0 Kagan dissent.
More likely that the “conservative” justices traded the election stand down for a decision to be named later.
Yes it does! I think it’s a leaf blower powered hover craft!
PING!
Or they let these obvious procedural ones through to give the appearance of justice being served.
since 2000 a unanimous decision has been more likely than any other result — averaging 36 percent of all decisions. Even when the court did not reach a unanimous judgment, the justices often secured overwhelming majorities, with 7-to-2 or 8-to-1 judgments making up roughly 15 percent of decisions. The 5-to-4 decisions, by comparison, occurred in only 19 percent of cases.
A blessing...
You're right it's insane - but it's also a way for the criminal democrat party to maintain power while killing or hurting Americans who have lived here for generations... it's also a way for democrats to replace their black pets... with larger numbers of the 'new poor'...
What distinguishes this case from the dozens of others where the liberal justices had no problem making up preposterous interpretations of statutes and nonexistent constitutional “rights”? Perhaps the liberal justices are actually disturbed by developments at the border? Maybe it’s something else but I can’t think of anything.
Amen, my FRiend.
We have a schizophrenic government.
Lamppost list.
I like that.
Trump is gone. They can act reasonably again.
For this court, a 9-0 opinion is like Luther nailing 99 Theses to a wooden church door...
...with a PILE DRIVER.
The case was so clear that it was 9-0.
He’s added 4 more??
Fatfingers.
Mobile keypad.
Y’know...
The struggle is real.
Ha mean affirmative action law school grad Warren’s position was denied 9to0. Wow.
It is like saying Davos is a very wealthy community with superb conditions and I, therefore, have a right to move there and be supported by the residents thereof.
The interesting part is the last few years, unanimity across all terms (which means all the cases decided annually, essentially), has been reasonably high relative to historical norms.
Empirical SCOTUS: Amid record-breaking consensus, the justices’ divisions still run deep
Still, as the piece points out, there are still pronounced partisan divisions...which should have manifest themselves in this case in particular...but didn't. So yes, pile driver indeed.
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.