Supreme Court upholds ICE detention without bail for serious criminals

Washington Times ^ | March 19, 2019 | By Stephen Dinan

[Jim Robinson]

Illegal immigrants with serious criminal records can be held without bail while awaiting deportation even if ICE didn’t immediately pick them up when they were released from prison or jail, the Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.

The 5-4 decision marked another rejection for the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the liberal panel that covers the country’s West Coast, and that has tested a number of legal theories on immigration law.

In this case, the 9th Circuit had ruled that under the law, if U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement immediately arrested someone released from a federal, state or local prison, they could be held without bond in the immigration detention system. But if ICE didn’t immediately arrest them, the migrants must be given a chance to make bond.

The case turned on a phrase in the law that says the no-bail determination applies to someone picked up by ICE “when the alien is released” from prison or jail.

The lower court ruled “when” must mean the day of release.

But Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., writing the majority opinion, said that could create a new loophole for sanctuary cities, which often refuse to alert ICE officers when releasing people from their local prisons and jails.

[Sarah Barracuda]

That’s what I have, AdBlock Pro, but in order to get on the site I had to disable it and I wasn’t going to do that
Thanks for the info :-)

[OddLane]

For two terms in a row now, the Supreme Court has endorsed the most extreme interpretation of immigration detention statutes, allowing mass incarceration of people without any hearing, simply because they are defending themselves against a deportation charge,” said Cecillia Wang, the ACLU’s deputy director.

Can we deport her while we're at it?

[Red Badger]

Two Wangs don’t make it right..........................

[Founding Father]

The 9th circuit gets overturned far more than other lower courts, from what I have heard.

Understand that the Supreme Court doesn't usually take cases to affirm; they take cases to reverse. That skews statistics some. Also, during the Enron debacle of blatant prosecutorial misconduct it was the 9th Circuit that ripped the US Attorneys apart.