US Supreme Court Bolsters Trump’s Power Over Rapid Deportation

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday enhanced the ability of President Donald Trump’s administration to quickly deport illegal immigrants including asylum seekers with limited judicial review, handing him a victory in a case involving one of his signature issues in an election year.

The justices ruled 7-2 in favor of the administration in its appeal of a lower court ruling that a Sri Lankan farmer named Vijayakumar Thuraissigiam had a right to have a judge review the government’s handling of his bid for asylum.

The ruling, written by conservative Justice Samuel Alito, found that limiting judicial scrutiny of his rapid deportation case, known as expedited removal, did not violate key safeguards of individual liberty in the U.S. Constitution. Two of the court’s four liberal justices, Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, joined the five conservative justices on the outcome but did not embrace Alito’s reasoning.

Alito wrote that it has long been recognized that people who have yet to be granted legal entry to the United States do not have the full range of constitutional rights and that Congress has some authority to determine what rights they do possess.

“While aliens who have established connections in this country have due process rights in deportation proceedings, the court long ago held that Congress is entitled to set the conditions for an alien’s lawful entry into this country,” Alito wrote.

Liberal justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan dissented.

The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2019 ruled that under the Constitution’s suspension clause – relating to a person’s ability to challenge confinement by the government – courts must have the power to review Thuraissigiam’s claims.

The administration contended that the 9th Circuit ruling would defeat the purpose of quick deportation and “impose a severe burden on the immigration system.” Trump’s hardline policies on immigration and deportation have been a centerpiece of his presidency and his bid for re-election on Nov. 3.

The American Civil Liberties Union, representing Thuraissigiam, had warned that the administration’s stance, if accepted by the court, could be used to deport millions of illegal immigrants without meaningful judicial review.

Last week, the Supreme Court delivered a blow to Trump by blocking his attempt to rescind a government program that protects “Dreamers” – mostly immigrants from Latin America brought to the United States illegally as children – from deportation.

Thuraissigiam sought asylum in the United States, claiming that as a member of Sri Lanka’s Tamil minority he was tortured over his political ties and subjected to beatings and simulated drowning. He fled Sri Lanka in 2016 and was arrested in 2017 just north of the U.S. border between San Diego, California, and Tijuana, Mexico.

He was placed on track for expedited removal, a system dating back to 1996 that makes an exception for immigrants who can establish a “credible fear” of persecution or torture in their home country. But officials rejected Thuraissigiam’s claim of credible fear, short-circuiting the asylum process.

(Reporting by Andrew Chung in New York and Lawrence Hurley in Washington; Editing by Will Dunham)

Responses

  1. Deport the anchor baby’s as well. Knew a nor cal illegal Mexican woman who had 20, that’s right 20 kids and all are citizens. She made a good living at it. She thanks you.

  2. One would have to be really ignorant to think that just because a foreigner, who walked over our border illegally, or filed for citizenship legally, would be given the full rights under the Constitution that a full fledged citizen had. To think that would be stupidity. It would be like someone breaking into your house and the law states, that since he did, everything in the house was his as much as yours! The Founding fathers knew that foreigners were FOREIGNERS, PERIOD! NOT CITIZENS IN ANY MANNER! BORDERS ARE BORDERS FOR A REASON! THIS OPEN BORDER 💩 IS JUST THAT! GOD MADE BORDERS, AND EXPECTED PEOPLE TO RESPECT THEM!! READ THE BIBLE, in the Children of Isreal, leaving Egypt!

    1. Since you’re talking about the founding fathers and their original vision, know this: there were no immigration controls in the 1700s. Anybody who wanted could come in, settle, set up a business, hire himself out to work, buy land. There was no idea of national citizenship at the founding. You were a citizen of your state.

      I don’t think that in biblical times a border ran along any negotiated line. Your tribe lived where it was, may or may not have claimed exclusive use of the lands there, and paid taxes and owed fealty to whatever king was able to squeeze the most blood out of them. The pharaoh was probably pretty certain of what was his; God was probably less definite about what was pharaoh’s. I doubt God set up Egypt’s borders.

      None of this means borders aren’t real today, or that they are unimportant. However, the history you cite doesn’t support you.

    2. The supreme court has consistently ruled that all persons on US soil have protections and rights under the constitution. Only where it explicitly says the word citizen is others not afforded that right. As far as voting, per the constitution, illegal immigrants are only prohibited from voting in federal elections. It is up to the states and local communities to decide who is allowed to vote in local elections, many do allow them to vote. They are covered by the 1st, 5th, and 14th amendments. It was by an executive signed by President Reagen that it gave illegal aliens the rights to access education, healthcare, and other social programs. This country has always had trouble handling immigration. This country was founded by illegal immigrants who decimated the local population and stole their land. For a country to remain a formidable power in the world, we need to have a continually growing population. Without it, our economy will decline as well as our position in the free world. China has realized this. They no longer have restrictions on the number of children per couple. They saw what a declining population can do to their economy and their place as a superpower in the world. China has now surpassed Russia and has its eyes on the US. Families in the US are having fewer children since the end of the baby boom. For our country to continue to grow, where do you suggest the people come from? Who will work in the factories, grow the food we need, provide care for an aging population. The only answer is immigration but in a more controlled manner. The only country in the world that has fenced themselves off from the rest of the world is Isreal. Isreal would not be able to survive without the welfare provided by the US and its citizens.

  3. trumpuke gets to be the anti-humanity prick he has always been

    and always will be.

    1. As a legal immigrant I couldn’t be happier. My parents did it legally and so can they!

      1. Uh no they can’t Harry.

        Under Goebbels Millers guidance,

        the evil bastard trumpuke has unilaterally

        rigged the system to work against immigrants

        seeking asylum.

        IF you are in fact a legal immigrant

        why are you supporting a total bigot president ?

    2. Your infantile name calling clearly show your substandard intelligence and the fact that you have no reasonable argument.

      1. R :

        Go Phuhk Yourself

        You patronizing, self satisfied, supercilious

        piece of shit.

Comments are closed.