Posted on 04/18/2018 4:09:15 PM PDT by conservative98
It is not necessary for illegal aliens to be convicted of other crimes, violent or not, for them to be removed.
The ruling was not about “immigration” per se. It was about a federal law - was it clear & transparent, or opaque and easily interpreted sometimes strictly and sometimes not by different choice/interpretations of the executive branch at different times. It is common error that Congress makes, which has the affect of making law what the DOJ interprets it to be, instead of having that explicit definition in law by Congress. It is another form of Congressional abdication of its authority and responsibility.
Few also noticed that the case involved not an illegal immigrant but a legal resident.
I am tough on ILLEGAL immigration. I am also tough on runaway executive power which is often handed to the executive by Congress abdicating its duties and responsibilities, in more than one way.
It’s funny all the “Conservatives” caught on the catch-word “immigration” and ignoring that Gorsuch was aligned with the same judicial logic that Scalia used in a case that was cited by the court’s majority in the case - another case about a law with too little transparency to it, leaving too much wiggle room for a “nation of men, instead of a nation of laws”.
BS....look into it a little more.
Trump’s appointees sure do go out of their way to go against the conservative wish.
How about just crime......any crime and they need to go. Period.
Everything that I have read indicates that Gorsuch did not rule that Trump is wrong.
He ruled that the law was poorly written and could lead to abuse by the government.
We are at present about to lose our freedom because of all of the poorly written laws that are open to abuse are are being abused. The forfeiture law, the rash of ant-gun laws, the Patriot Act, which is certainly misnamed, the EPA act, on and on and on.
Why would any truly conservative person want another poorly written law?
It appears that if the law is re-written with very clear guidelines and penalties, the law would pass the court.
To the above list of bad laws....add the special counselor. That should be a lesson to all.
I agree with Gorush on this.
He is absolutely, righteously, correct.
.
They’re illegal invaders!
They committed a crime to get here. This is judicial nose picking.
.
Arguments over what constitutes a “violent crime” in federal criminal law and sentencing guidelines has been going on for years. I deal with it all of the time. It’s extremely complex stuff that some authors have no business even commenting on. Then for the news to print headlines like “Trump dealt huge blow on immigration” is absolutely absurd. Those people have no idea about the crime of violence argument in federal criminal law. It has nothing to do with Trump at all. Ridiculous.
I suspect these attacks against Gorsuch are part of a coordinated NeverTrump attack to undermine one of Trump’s major wins.
What a disgrace.
I suspect that you are correct. In my opinion, Gorsuch’s concurring opinion is the conservative opinion.
Twitter is all about people commenting without knowing most of the facts.
Looks like Gorsuch pulled a Scalia to me.
“...Looks like Gorsuch pulled a Scalia to me.”
*****************************************
That’s EXACTLY what he did. Like Scalia, Gorsuch is a literalist... AND THAT IS GOOD NEWS for us. I wish more FReepers would understand that, as you did.
Felony will never pass. It is a felony to cross the border and remain.
Trump tweeted the same notion as well... this is for Congress to fix, not the courts or the President.
He did. Its called "principle over result." With that said, Thomas in a dissenting opinion remained principled to his belief that the "void for vagueness doctrine" conflicts with the original intent of the 5th Amendment. Maybe they are both right.
In contrast, many of the simpletons here at FR have a "result based opinion," which is exactly the type of judicial activism that they protest when it comes from the left.
No foreign national has the right to remain here against the will of the political branches. Gorsuch dealt with this point in only one sentence when he acknowledged the president’s power over immigration, but charged that “to acknowledge that the president has broad authority to act in this general area supplies no justification for allowing judges to give content to an impermissibly vague law.”
Unbelievable bullsh!t. Gorsuch is a MORON
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.