Skip to comments.
The Supreme Court just handed the Trump administration a loss on immigration — and Gorsuch
AP ^
| 4/17/18
| AP
Posted on 04/17/2018 8:03:55 AM PDT by BOARn
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120, 121 next last
To: pgkdan
I guess well have to wait for the stooges in Congress to rewrite this law. This doesnt look good at all. Congress is not on our side despite the destruction to our country in contravention to spirit of the Declaration and Constitution.
81
posted on
04/17/2018 11:06:19 AM PDT
by
Crucial
To: mooncoin
Gorsuch was supposed to be conservative...hahahaaha! SAD. HRC must have blackmailed him too, like Roberts, or these SCJerks are just as leftist as half the country!
May God remove those in SC, that Trump could actually replace with a REAL CONSERVATIVE without a bleeding heart for insanity!
82
posted on
04/17/2018 11:09:43 AM PDT
by
Ambrosia
(.)
To: Oldeconomybuyer
Couldnt crimes of violence be defined within one page or even one sentence? It implies bodily harm. If it was simply stated as rape, assault, aggravated assault, manslaughter and murder, would that not be enough? I personally think the bar should be quite low and this isnt necessarily a low bar.
83
posted on
04/17/2018 11:14:46 AM PDT
by
Crucial
To: CottonBall
84
posted on
04/17/2018 11:23:34 AM PDT
by
caww
To: apillar
Not to mention, the whole case, all the way from the deportation proceeds through the filing of the petition for cert in the Supreme Court, happened during the Obama Administration. The only thing the Trump Administration did was have its solicitor general’s office argue the case and, maybe, file the brief.
To: BillyBoy
So you want judge’s to act like the liberals but just come down on the conservative view of things? The Liberals clearly look at the result they want and build come crazy logic to get it. I know why we’d want “our guys” to do the same but I also know why it’s not a good idea”
To: wastedyears
Who is any court to tell the president he cannot deport anybody?
I should think that a court absolutely has and should have the power to tell the President he cannot deport someone. The President's only Constitutional power to deport anyone is his power to enforce the immigration and naturalization laws enacted by Congress, and a person the President seeks to deport absolutely has a right to due process of law before being deported.
I don't really agree with Gorsuch that the law is so vague that it violates due process, but I absolutely agree that any person has a right to due process before being deported. Otherwise, what is to stop the President from deporting you or me?
To: BOARn
If I am not mistaken, this ruling only applies to legal resident immigrants; NOT illegal aliens. Unlike the mass media headlines, this appears a very minor loss that could be easily legislatively reconciled...
88
posted on
04/17/2018 12:31:05 PM PDT
by
DBeers
(The concept of peace in Islam requires not co-existence but submission.)
To: Jim 0216
Two problems:
1) the decision is unconstitutional because the Constitution does not protect aliens, only U.S. citizens.
Ok, I'll bite. Where does the word "citizen" appear in the Fifth Amendment?
2) The Supreme Court does NOT MAKE NATIONAL LAW. The Constitution empowers ONLY CONGRESS to legislate. The constitutional and legitimate scope of SCOTUS decisions reach only to the PARTIES of the case.
The Founders understood it differently from you. Read Federalist 78.
Thus Trump is not bound by this decision regarding James Dimaya because it is an unconstitutional decision and is certainly not bound from continuing efforts to deport aliens under The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).
So you want the President to be able to decide for himself whether he is violating the Constitution? Exactly how much power do you want to give the next Democrat President?
To: BOARn
So let me get this straight....crimes of violence is too vague but hate crimes, which are unconstitutionally used to stiffen sentencing, is crystal clear. Right - got it...
90
posted on
04/17/2018 12:40:27 PM PDT
by
Shethink13
(there are 0 electoral votes in the state of denial)
To: Sgt_Schultze
From the summary, I cant tell if it impacts illegal invaders, which were the core of DJTs campaign.Aliens who are here illegally are deportable, regardless of whether they committed any other crime or not. The statute at issue in this case only applied to aliens here legally (on a student visa, a green card, etc.).
To: CottonBall
92
posted on
04/17/2018 1:16:53 PM PDT
by
caww
To: The Pack Knight
8 US Code 1182
He can’t deport me because I was born here to American-born citizens.
Do illegal aliens have the right to due process that you and I enjoy? What does Mexico do with illegal entrants?
93
posted on
04/17/2018 1:17:54 PM PDT
by
wastedyears
(Americans are dreamers too.)
To: The Pack Knight
Where does the word "citizen" appear in the Fifth Amendment? The intent of the first ten amendments is not to grant a list of rights - they are already pre-existent per the Declaration of Independence. They are a sampling of rights the feds are not to violate as confirmed by the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.
Aliens did not delegate the powers to the feds via the Constitution. "We the People" did via the States. Aliens are not under the purview of the Constitution. They are like U.S. territories, under federal authority but outside the purview of the Constitution.
"ALL legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States" U.S. Const., Art I, Sec. 1.
The Constitution trumps whatever uncited portion of Federalist 78 you are referring.
However, Federalist 78 does say, "No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid."
An invalid law or unconstitutional decision may be ignored by any other branch of government and/or the sovereign states. However, good faith demands they give a reasoned constitutional basis for their rejection of such federal acts.
94
posted on
04/17/2018 2:29:43 PM PDT
by
Jim W N
To: Abathar
Someone is going to offer a $2 bounty on illegals & nothing the USSC can do will stop it. Then the Genie will be out of the bottle.
To: BOARn
The law needs to be rewritten with more specificity, so that’s what the lawmakers need to get at ASAP before November. Gorsuch’s role is to interpret the Constitution, not to deliver victories for Trump or any other President.
96
posted on
04/17/2018 3:05:02 PM PDT
by
ScottinVA
( Liberals, go find another country.)
To: wiseprince
Re: 86
Best post of the thread. Thanks.
97
posted on
04/17/2018 3:56:43 PM PDT
by
Fury
To: BOARn
In reading on the case the term violence was used too broadly, they had use that term to deport someone who committed burglary. These are legal residents by the way.
To: BOARn
Trying to show his independence from the President who appointed him! Nothing Ruth B. Ginsberg, Stephen Breyer, S. Sotomayor, or E. Kagan ever have done
To: wastedyears
8 US Code 1182
Yes. Courts get to decide whether that law applies to a particular person. They also get to decide whether that law complies with the Constitution.
He cant deport me because I was born here to American-born citizens.
So you say. I'm sure a lot of illegals say the same. Suppose the President, acting through ICE, doesn't believe you. Should they get to just deport you? Or do you think they should have to prove you are an illegal alien in court first?
Do illegal aliens have the right to due process that you and I enjoy? What does Mexico do with illegal entrants?
Yes, they get to have a fair hearing to determine that they are illegal aliens before being deported. The last I checked, most illegals don't have "Illegal Alien" branded on their foreheads, nor do they always admit to being illegal or even aliens. Someone has to determine whether they are illegal aliens. Such as a judge, after hearing evidence.
Mexico treats illegal entrants like crap. They treat pretty much everyone like crap. They don't have much respect for due process. They have a lot of chutzpah complaining about how we treat illegals. Glad I don't live there. What's your point?
Also, the immigrant in this case was not illegal. He was a permanent legal resident.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120, 121 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson