Thread: Trump Supreme Court Pick Gorsuch Sides With Liberal Democrats on Immigration Violence

Way to go Trump and Gorsuch! Looks like Trump handed the Supreme Court over to the socialists on immigration issues.

---

SCOTUS nixes part of law requiring deportation of immigrants convicted of some crimes


By Ariane de Vogue, CNN Supreme Court Reporter
Updated 11:32 AM ET, Tue April 17, 2018


(CNN)The Supreme Court on Tuesday invalidated a provision of federal law that requires the mandatory deportation of immigrants who have been convicted of some "crimes of violence," holding that the law is unconstitutionally vague.

The case, Sessions v. Dimaya, had originated during the Obama administration but had been closely watched to see if the justices would reveal how they will consider the Trump administration's overall push to both limit immigration and increase deportations.
As expected after the oral argument, Justice Neil Gorsuch joined with the more liberal justices for the first time since joining the court to produce a 5-4 majority invalidating the federal statute. In doing so, Gorsuch was continuing the jurisprudence of Justice Antonin Scalia, who also sided with liberals when it came to the vagueness of statutes used to convict criminal defendants.

Trump's originalist, Neil Gorsuch, finds his place


Only eight justices heard the case last term after Scalia's death, and in late June, the court announced it would re-hear arguments this term, presumably so that Gorsuch could break some kind of a tie.
James Garcia Dimaya, a native of the Philippines, was admitted to the United States in 1992 when he was 13 as a lawful permanent resident. In 2007 and 2009, he pleaded no contest to charges of residential burglary in California. In 2010, the Obama administration brought removal proceedings against Dimaya. An immigration judge determined that Dimaya was removable from the US because of his two state court convictions.
The court held that the convictions qualified for an "aggravated felony" under the Immigration and Nationality Act, which authorizes removal of non-citizens who have been convicted of some violent crimes and defines aggravated felony to include "crimes of violence."
Lawyers for Dimaya appealed the removal arguing that it was unconstitutionally vague and that their client never had fair notice that his crimes would result in deportation.
They suggested the reasoning of a 2015 Scalia opinion, which struck a provision of the Armed Career Criminal Act as unconstitutionally vague, should extend to their case.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Dimaya's favor.
In court, arguing for the Trump administration, Deputy Solicitor General Edwin Kneedler said that when it comes to deportation, "I think it is important for the court to understand that immigration provisions and grounds for deportation are often written in very broad and general terms and given content by the executive branch in which Congress has vested authority."
Michael Kagan of the University of Nevada Las Vegas, an expert on immigration law, notes that Dimaya's challenge began when President Barack Obama was still in office and that Tuesday's ruling is "another sign from the court that due process matters when it comes to deportation."
"This ruling is something immigrants can cite to as they argue for more constitutional protections in other areas," he said.

CNN's Veronica Stracqualursi contributed to this report.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/17/polit...nts/index.html

Supreme Court strikes down part of immigration law

@ Supreme Court restricts deportations of immigrant felons

We need to reduce the number of green card holders by a substantial margin, eliminate chain migration and the visa lottery, and remember that a green card holder is a permanent legal resident so once you issue that card you're pretty much stuck with them no matter what they become or do. That's one of the reasons we want as few as possible, and right now we have way too many, the only way to offset that is with a moratorium or substantial reductions in the numbers.

The history of the US Supreme Court has always been advantage to immigrants over citizens. I'm not aware of any US Supreme Court Ruling that favored citizens over immigrants, regardless of how many liberals or conservatives, Democrats or Republicans, served on the court. The attitude of the court has basically been if you let them in, then you treat them as a person with due process rights. The way to avoid these situations is to not let them in to begin with or in the case of illegal aliens remove them as quickly as possible.

For our cause, the courts are not our friends, and never have been.

The Constitution gives our government an unrestricted power to prevent and prohibit immigration, to prevent entry and remove those here illegally, it does not give us the power to mistreat them while they're here because they are protected as a person by the US Bill of Rights.

REMOVE ALL ILLEGAL ALIENS WITHIN 24 HOURS OF APPREHENSION!

NO FREE PASS NO MATTER WHAT CRIME THEY COMMIT!!!

Originally Posted by Beezer

REMOVE ALL ILLEGAL ALIENS WITHIN 24 HOURS OF APPREHENSION!

NO FREE PASS NO MATTER WHAT CRIME THEY COMMIT!!!

This immigrant was not illegal. He is here legally. Judy is right.

Yank the Green Card and deport!

I hope this isn't a snapshot of things to come. Justice Gorsuch siding with liberal justices on future immigration issues would be disastrous for us.

Trump says legislation needed after Supreme Court ruling on criminal aliens

Originally Posted by JohnDoe2

Trump says legislation needed after Supreme Court ruling on criminal aliens

And of course any new legislation would include AMNESTY for millions of illegals.. So sick of this game.

We have to have the votes in Congress to do some of the things we want done.