This commentary is moronic, all he said was that “violent crime” is too vague and he sent it back to the court to define what “violent crime” was. Make it a felony, or something else defined, and it’ll be good to go.
I think we are in the minority, but I agree with you.
I happen also to agree with you and I don’t think we are actually in the minority. See my post #8 on what Gorsuch actually said. To someone who believes that the Constitution should have sharp edges that cut deeply (to quote WFB) Gorsuch sounds pretty good.
This is a very disturbing line of argument. Gorsuch is suggesting that it is automatically the court’s job to control the permissibility of a deportation.
Gorsuch suggested no such thing.
It’s the legislatures who screwed up. It’s not like there aren’t actual crimes listed. This was just one of those kitchen sink clauses. The legislature now has an obligation to fix it.
Hope you’re right, and my gut says you are though I haven’t studied the ruling.
How about just crime......any crime and they need to go. Period.
.
They’re illegal invaders!
They committed a crime to get here. This is judicial nose picking.
.
Felony will never pass. It is a felony to cross the border and remain.
>> This commentary is moronic <<
So what else is new?