Catch and Release is over - Its catch and wait in Mexico now

[Weatherman2020]

Make America Safe Again

4 Leftards voted to make America Lawless.

Supreme Court sides with Trump on detention of immigrants

 

[WTH_Progs?]

Leftards are evil-doers posing as do-gooders

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Thank God we still have at least some sanity.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

See why the Lord would not allow Hillary into the White House?

 

[Weatherman2020]

The 500 pound gorilla in the room is that if governments don’t enforce justice, then citizens begin to do it for them. And the results are rarely pretty.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Make America Safe Again

4 Leftards voted to make America Lawless.

Supreme Court sides with Trump on detention of immigrants

Good ruling.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[DOTR]

Winning. Not tired yet.

 

[Fang]

Stunning this even had to go to the SCOTUS. Which part of "ILLEGAL" do Democrats not get?

 

[radical right]

Stunning this even had to go to the SCOTUS. Which part of "ILLEGAL" do Democrats not get?

How about the federal law under which they executed the detention had an "immediacy" requirement between release from criminal custody, and being taken into detention.

It's like a cop seeing an armed gunman, and letting him go, only to shoot him six months later when he was no longer armed.

 

[DJT for Life]

The 500 pound gorilla in the room is that if governments don’t enforce justice, then citizens begin to do it for them. And the results are rarely pretty.

That ruling seems to dig at California and some other States' recent activities.

The States will not be on solid ground when it comes to not honoring ICE detainers. They could be held financially responsible if they do not
honor the Detainer and an ICE agent is harmed in a future arrest of that Criminal.

The Court has said, if ICE wants them out of here, they're going out of here, no matter how long it takes to get them. It also implies the definition of
an illegal alien. They are not supposed to be here, they have committed a crime while they were here, and we will throw them out of here after
they go thru Due Process in a court room, no matter how long they have to be held waiting for a court date.

It's just a first step with a few more to follow, but SCOTUS is attacking...those States that do not comply with Federal Authorities.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Should have a chilling effect on those cities and counties who refuse to notify ICE of those they detain. Now the POTUS has clear path to hold them accountable criminally for not complying.. This one is going to leave a mark on the sanctuary crowd..

 

[Montrovant]

Stunning this even had to go to the SCOTUS. Which part of "ILLEGAL" do Democrats not get?

Did you read the article, or any other article on this case? The men were legal immigrants.

From the OP article: "At the center of the case are immigrants Mony Preap and Bassam Yusuf Khoury, who are in the U.S. as lawful permanent residents."

Here's another article in which it states that one of the men actually won his deportation case after being detained: "One of the lead plaintiffs involved in the California case, Mony Preap, has been a lawful permanent resident of the United States since 1981 and has two convictions for possession of marijuana. He was released from prison in 2006 but was not taken into immigration custody until 2013. Preap has since won his deportation case, allowing him to remain in the country."
Supreme Court rules against immigrants in detention case

This was not a simple illegal alien case.

 

[Lesh]

Make America Safe Again

4 Leftards voted to make America Lawless.

Supreme Court sides with Trump on detention of immigrants

The ruling was not about that at all

 

[WillowTree]

Stunning this even had to go to the SCOTUS. Which part of "ILLEGAL" do Democrats not get?

Did you read the article, or any other article on this case? The men were legal immigrants.

From the OP article: "At the center of the case are immigrants Mony Preap and Bassam Yusuf Khoury, who are in the U.S. as lawful permanent residents."

Here's another article in which it states that one of the men actually won his deportation case after being detained: "One of the lead plaintiffs involved in the California case, Mony Preap, has been a lawful permanent resident of the United States since 1981 and has two convictions for possession of marijuana. He was released from prison in 2006 but was not taken into immigration custody until 2013. Preap has since won his deportation case, allowing him to remain in the country."
Supreme Court rules against immigrants in detention case

This was not a simple illegal alien case.

From the article




The issue in the case before the justices had to do with the detention of noncitizens who have committed a broad range of crimes that make them deportable. Immigration law tells the government it must arrest those people when they are released from custody and then hold them while an immigration court decides whether they should be deported.

 

[jc456]

Leftards are evil-doers posing as do-gooders

the trojan horse they are.

 

[Fang]

Stunning this even had to go to the SCOTUS. Which part of "ILLEGAL" do Democrats not get?

Did you read the article, or any other article on this case? The men were legal immigrants.

From the OP article: "At the center of the case are immigrants Mony Preap and Bassam Yusuf Khoury, who are in the U.S. as lawful permanent residents."

Here's another article in which it states that one of the men actually won his deportation case after being detained: "One of the lead plaintiffs involved in the California case, Mony Preap, has been a lawful permanent resident of the United States since 1981 and has two convictions for possession of marijuana. He was released from prison in 2006 but was not taken into immigration custody until 2013. Preap has since won his deportation case, allowing him to remain in the country."
Supreme Court rules against immigrants in detention case

This was not a simple illegal alien case.

At which point they are illegal.

 

[Fang]

Stunning this even had to go to the SCOTUS. Which part of "ILLEGAL" do Democrats not get?

Did you read the article, or any other article on this case? The men were legal immigrants.

From the OP article: "At the center of the case are immigrants Mony Preap and Bassam Yusuf Khoury, who are in the U.S. as lawful permanent residents."

Here's another article in which it states that one of the men actually won his deportation case after being detained: "One of the lead plaintiffs involved in the California case, Mony Preap, has been a lawful permanent resident of the United States since 1981 and has two convictions for possession of marijuana. He was released from prison in 2006 but was not taken into immigration custody until 2013. Preap has since won his deportation case, allowing him to remain in the country."
Supreme Court rules against immigrants in detention case

This was not a simple illegal alien case.

From the article




The issue in the case before the justices had to do with the detention of noncitizens who have committed a broad range of crimes that make them deportable. Immigration law tells the government it must arrest those people when they are released from custody and then hold them while an immigration court decides whether they should be deported.

Exactly. They've committed crimes. Which means they are illegally here.

 

[Meathead]

Make America Safe Again

4 Leftards voted to make America Lawless.

Supreme Court sides with Trump on detention of immigrants

Thank God we've got Gorsuch instead of Garland.

 

[martybegan]

Stunning this even had to go to the SCOTUS. Which part of "ILLEGAL" do Democrats not get?

How about the federal law under which they executed the detention had an "immediacy" requirement between release from criminal custody, and being taken into detention.

It's like a cop seeing an armed gunman, and letting him go, only to shoot him six months later when he was no longer armed.

No, it's like arresting him 6 months later if he got away.

Getting away absolves someone of a crime?

And please point out the part of the law that had an immediacy requirement.

 

[Montrovant]

Stunning this even had to go to the SCOTUS. Which part of "ILLEGAL" do Democrats not get?

Did you read the article, or any other article on this case? The men were legal immigrants.

From the OP article: "At the center of the case are immigrants Mony Preap and Bassam Yusuf Khoury, who are in the U.S. as lawful permanent residents."

Here's another article in which it states that one of the men actually won his deportation case after being detained: "One of the lead plaintiffs involved in the California case, Mony Preap, has been a lawful permanent resident of the United States since 1981 and has two convictions for possession of marijuana. He was released from prison in 2006 but was not taken into immigration custody until 2013. Preap has since won his deportation case, allowing him to remain in the country."
Supreme Court rules against immigrants in detention case

This was not a simple illegal alien case.

From the article




The issue in the case before the justices had to do with the detention of noncitizens who have committed a broad range of crimes that make them deportable. Immigration law tells the government it must arrest those people when they are released from custody and then hold them while an immigration court decides whether they should be deported.

Exactly. They've committed crimes. Which means they are illegally here.

Actually, it does not. As I pointed out, one of the men won his deportation hearing and is still in the country legally.

I'm no immigration expert, so if you can point to the relevant law/rulings which indicate that any legal immigrant who is convicted of any crime is automatically denied the right to remain a legal resident, I'd be happy to read it. Based on the deportation hearing ruling against one of the men in this case, the judicial system seems to disagree with your statement, though.