Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gorsuch is dead wrong on immigration
Conservative Review ^ | April 18, 2018 | Daniel Horowitz

Posted on 04/18/2018 4:09:15 PM PDT by conservative98

The “but Gorsuch…” rallying cry for voting GOP is starting to run out of gas as the judiciary gets worse and worse and even “our” appointees find some convoluted reason to go along with the left-wing judicial supremacists who make a mockery of the will of the people.

In case you thought courts granting new rights to criminal aliens was a pastime only of the left-wing judges on the Ninth Circuit, think again. Yesterday, Neil Gorsuch joined with the four most extreme-left justices to rule that an entire statute of Congress mandating deportation for criminal aliens convicted of a crime of violence is “unconstitutionally vague.” While many conservative commentators defending and even championing his opinion are focusing on the regulatory aspect of Gorsuch’s rationale as it applies to general criminal law, they fail to observe that this is truly unprecedented and divorced from our entire history of immigration jurisprudence on deportations.

(Excerpt) Read more at conservativereview.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: gorsuch; immigration; trump
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-67 last
To: conservative98
Oooooor, he wants them to reword it so nothing in it can be termed subjective vs. objective....we should all detest laws with lots of room for "interpretation"...
61 posted on 04/19/2018 3:38:47 AM PDT by trebb (I stopped picking on the mentally ill hypocrites who pose as conservatives...mostly ;-})
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservative98

I think the issue is that the law was too vaguely written and not the fundamental premise of deportation. The language should be tightened and reissued.


62 posted on 04/19/2018 4:04:11 AM PDT by Jimmy Valentine (DemocRATS - when they speak, they lie; when they are silent, they are stealing the American Dream)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jyo19

>> This commentary is moronic <<

So what else is new?


63 posted on 04/19/2018 7:41:42 AM PDT by Hawthorn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jyo19

>> I really can’t believe I need to explain this <<

You must be very new around here.


64 posted on 04/19/2018 7:43:10 AM PDT by Hawthorn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson

>> most people have attacked him without reading him <<

Yep, we believe that if you read more than the headlines, it is bad for your health.


65 posted on 04/19/2018 7:45:14 AM PDT by Hawthorn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Wuli

>> “Conservatives” caught on the catch-word “immigration” <<

Par for the course. Just lean back and enjoy it.


66 posted on 04/19/2018 7:49:21 AM PDT by Hawthorn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: conservative98
PS Here is the CA penal code on burglary

Every person who enters any house, room, apartment, tenement, shop, warehouse, store, mill, barn, stable, outhouse or other building, tent, vessel, as defined in Section 21 of the Harbors and Navigation Code, floating home, as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 18075.55 of the Health and Safety Code, railroad car, locked or sealed cargo container, whether or not mounted on a vehicle, trailer coach, as defined in Section 635 of the Vehicle Code, any house car, as defined in Section 362 of the Vehicle Code, inhabited camper, as defined in Section 243 of the Vehicle Code, vehicle as defined by the Vehicle Code, when the doors are locked, aircraft as defined by Section 21012 of the Public Utilities Code, or mine or any underground portion thereof, with intent to commit grand or petit larceny or any felony is guilty of burglary. As used in this chapter, “inhabited” means currently being used for dwelling purposes, whether occupied or not. A house, trailer, vessel designed for habitation, or portion of a building is currently being used for dwelling purposes if, at the time of the burglary, it was not occupied solely because a natural or other disaster caused the occupants to leave the premises..

In other words, if I enter your house, with the intent of offering for purchase a time share which I should have known was fraudulent, I have committed a fraud and therefore committed a burglary, even if I leave peaceably with no purchase agreement, cash or pilfered item in hand. Unless my pen and paper are regarded as assault weapons there was no threat of violence intended or implied.

Thus, as Gorsuch stated, the connection between a burglary and a crime of violence is too vague to be enforceable.

67 posted on 04/19/2018 8:04:37 AM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-67 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson