Immigration

SCOTUS: Illegal immigrant avoids deportation thanks to a technicality

Published

3 years ago

April 29, 2021

The Supreme Court ruled against the deportation of a Guatemalan man because the government failed to notify him of his legal hearing in a single notice.

According to federal law, even an illegal immigrant can avoid deportation if they stay in the country for 10 years. However, if at anytime within those 10 years he or she receives “a notice to appear” at an immigration hearing, the jig is up. Once the notice is received the person must endure the hearing or face deportation. Some endure the hearing and still face deportation. But not Guatemala-born Agusto Niz-Chavez.

Niz-Chavez lucked out because he received several notices that all had different pieces of information. The Court ruled that because the law calls for “a notice” the government broke the law and could not deport him.

Chavez’s ruling came down to 6-3. Liberal Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Stephen Breyer, as well as conservatives Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett and Clarence Thomas were the 6 in favor. Opposing judges included Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito.

Justice Gorsuch, who wrote the assenting opinion, recognized that the Court played with semantics. “”At one level, today’s dispute may seem semantic, focused on a single word, a small one at that,” wrote Gorsuch. “But words are how the law constrains power. In this case, the law’s terms ensure that, when the federal government seeks a procedural advantage against an individual, it will at least supply him with a single and reasonably comprehensive statement of the nature of the proceedings against him.”

However, Justice Kavanaugh did not agree about the power of a single word. “I find the Court’s conclusion rather perplexing as a matter of statutory interpretation and common sense,” Kavanaugh wrote.

Immigration

NYC Mayor Adams’ budget cuts slash total number of police and education funds

Published

2 weeks ago

November 17, 2023

Sara Carter Staff

GettyImages 1370356383 scaled e1644995315596

“No city should be left to handle a national humanitarian crisis largely on its own, and without the significant and timely support we need from Washington, D.C., today’s budget will only be the beginning,” said New York City Democratic Mayor Eric Adams about his decision to make budget cuts as a result of the overwhelming migrant crisis.

However, those who will suffer from budget cuts to the city’s services to offset the cost of dealing with the ever-increasing number of migrants are those that are in place to make the city better.

“The cuts will see police freeze hiring and bring the total number of police officers below 30,000. It would further slash the education budget by $1 billion over two years and affect a litany of other agencies” reports Just The News.

Albeit, Adams admitted: “In all my time in government, this is probably one of the most painful exercises I’ve gone through.” More than 110,000 migrants have arrived in New York City over the past year, including roughly 13,000 sent from Texas by GOP Governor Greg Abbott as part of his ongoing bussing plan to send new arrivals to the U.S. to sanctuary cities.

However, similar to other leaders of sanctuary cities, Adams is unwilling to put his money where his mouth is. In September, Adams warned that the crisis would “destroy New York City” and begged the federal government to pay for his mess.

“I’m gonna tell you something, New Yorkers, never in my life have I had a problem that I didn’t see an ending to. I don’t see an ending to this,” Adams said at the time. “The federal government needs to do its job. We need the federal government, the Congress members, the Senate and the president to do their job: close the borders,” said Adams’ advisor Ingrid Lewis Martin insisted in early October. “And until you close the borders, you need to come on with a full-on decompression strategy where you can take all of our migrants and move them through our 50 states.”