- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Supreme Court rules non citizens can be held indefinitely without bond
Posted on 2/27/18 at 11:12 am to tgrbaitn08
Posted on 2/27/18 at 11:12 am to tgrbaitn08
quote:
Upholding the constitution is
Correct.
quote:
Is for the betterment of the country
Maybe, maybe not. But if something is for the betterment of the country, it follows from the purpose of interpreting a law's constitutionality. You can't hold 'betterment of the country' as the highest purpose.
1
Posted on 2/27/18 at 11:14 am to castorinho
quote:
even if they have permanent legal status
yeah i dont get that either
Posted on 2/27/18 at 11:15 am to NYNolaguy1
I assume more private confinement facilities are going from conception to reality today...
What better way to ensure human per diem than a slow as shite government?
Posted on 2/27/18 at 11:15 am to NYNolaguy1
quote:
In this case we are asked to interpret three provisions of U. S. immigration law that authorize the Government to detain aliens in the course of immigration proceedings.
All parties appear to agree that the text of these provisions, when read most naturally, does not give detained
aliens the right to periodic bond hearings during the course of their detention. But by relying on the constitutional avoidance canon of statutory interpretation, the Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that detained aliens have a statutory right to periodic bond hearings under the
provisions at issue.
Under the constitutional-avoidance canon, when statutory language is susceptible of multiple interpretations, a court may shun an interpretation that raises serious
constitutional doubts and instead may adopt an alternative that avoids those problems. But a court relying on
that canon still must interpret the statute, not rewrite it.
Because the Court of Appeals in this case adopted implausible constructions of the three immigration provisions at
issue, we reverse its judgment and remand for further
proceedings.
Oh the humanity
Posted on 2/27/18 at 11:15 am to HempHead
Holding legal immigrants indefinitely without trial is an interesting way of MAGA.
Posted on 2/27/18 at 11:15 am to SabiDojo
You're gonna be okay, right buddy?
Posted on 2/27/18 at 11:16 am to Brosef Stalin
quote:
Does this imply the Constitution only applies to citizens?
I would certainly hope so.
Posted on 2/27/18 at 11:17 am to HempHead
I'll let you know when I get a hearing to determine my fate
Posted on 2/27/18 at 11:17 am to SabiDojo
Posted on 2/27/18 at 11:18 am to MontyFranklyn
quote:
Honestly should have always been this way. I'm a humanitarian and all, but if you commit a violent crime intentionally or not, you have to realize there are consequences.
I like to think our criminal justice system was setup to punish the guilty after trial, not claim guilt before and have no obligation for a trial.
Posted on 2/27/18 at 11:19 am to NYNolaguy1
quote:
Immigrants can be held by U.S. immigration officials indefinitely without receiving bond hearings
quote:
even if they have permanent legal status
Now this seems fricked up...
Aren't they US citizens at this point and should be given full rights as such?
Posted on 2/27/18 at 11:20 am to TheCaterpillar
quote:
Aren't they US citizens at this point and should be given full rights as such?
They aren't citizens, no.
Posted on 2/27/18 at 11:22 am to TheCaterpillar
quote:
Aren't they US citizens at this point and should be given full rights as such?
Nope.
Posted on 2/27/18 at 11:23 am to SSpaniel
quote:
Does this imply the Constitution only applies to citizens?quote:
I would certainly hope so.
Do what?? Seriously?
Are most people ITT aware of the impact to immigrants who have received visas to be on our soil through proper channels, and who are also pursuing permanent residency through proper channels?
Posted on 2/27/18 at 11:23 am to Vood
Americans don't get an automatic bond hearing every six months. Exactly why should an illegal?
Posted on 2/27/18 at 11:25 am to tLSU
quote:
Americans don't get an automatic bond hearing every six months. Exactly why should an illegal?
American citizens have a right to a bond hearing though.
Posted on 2/27/18 at 11:25 am to tLSU
quote:
Americans don't get an automatic bond hearing every six months. Exactly why should an illegal?
They do, however, get to have bond hearings - indefinite detention of an American citizen is unconstitutional (even though it happens sometimes). This decision also applies to legal immigrants.
Posted on 2/27/18 at 11:26 am to NYNolaguy1
Yes, and they all had a bond hearing when they were initially brought in. It's no surprise that a person who has an extremely low chance of ever returning to court isn't given bond. This case has nothing to do with that. It's periodic bond hearing during the course of the case.
quote:
The court then construed §1226(a) to mean that an alien must be given a bond hearing every six months and that detention beyond the initial 6-month period is permitted only if the Government proves by clear and convincing evidence that further detention is justified.
This post was edited on 2/27/18 at 11:30 am
Posted on 2/27/18 at 11:29 am to tLSU
quote:
Yes, and they all had a bond hearing when they were initially brought in.
I was going off of the first sentence of the article.
quote:
Immigrants can be held by U.S. immigration officials indefinitely without receiving bond hearings, even if they have permanent legal status or are seeking asylum, the Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.
Eta: Admittedly I didnt read the decision.
This post was edited on 2/27/18 at 11:30 am
Posted on 2/27/18 at 11:30 am to TheCaterpillar
quote:
even if they have permanent legal status
Now this seems fricked up...
Aren't they US citizens at this point and should be given full rights as such?
No. These are people that have green cards. Basically that just means that they are not here on a visa and they can stay to live and work as long as they want to, barring a change in status. However, they are not citizens and do not have the same rights citizens do.
This post was edited on 2/27/18 at 11:31 am
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News