SCOTUS Takes Up Major Immigration Case Between Texas And Biden Administration

Republic Brief ^ | 30/11/22 | Kari Donovan

[Eleutheria5]

The Supreme Court on Tuesday questioned the Biden administration’s authority to prioritize which non-citizens to deport when hearing a challenge brought by two GOP state attorneys general who say the Department of Homeland Security is skirting federal immigration law.

The justices were considering three distinct issues in the case, which opens the door to shifting majorities. After arguments, it wasn’t clear if there was a clear majority in any one area.

The case was brought by Texas and Louisiana.

“At the heart of the dispute is a September 2021 memo from Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas that laid out priorities for the arrest, detention and deportation of certain non-citizens, reversing efforts by former President Donald Trump to increase deportations,” CNN reported, adding:

Several of the conservative justices on Tuesday seemed ready to rule in favor of the states on a major threshold issue: whether Texas and Louisiana had the legal right to bring the challenge in the first place.

Turning to the merits of the case – whether the Biden administration’s guidelines conflicted with two provisions of federal law – Alito, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh repeatedly pointed out that the law says that some immigrants “shall” be taken into custody or removed, suggesting some skepticism about the administration’s discretion in the area.

“Shall means shall,” Roberts said. “Shouldn’t we just say what we think the law is,” he suggested, and leave it to the other branches to “sort that out.”

Arguments lasted for over two hours.

A district court judge blocked the guidelines nationwide. “Using the words ‘discretion’ and ‘prioritization’ the Executive Branch claims the authority to suspend statutory mandates,” ruled Judge Drew Tipton, a Trump appointee on the US District Court for the Southern District of Texas. “The law does not sanction this approach.”

.....

[MIA_eccl1212]

for president yes.... does it specify that for other impeached individuals in other portions of government?

impeachment only requires a simple majority in the house... but conviction in the senate... is a different matter no?

[for-q-clinton]

Wi did fix some stuff

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

The Constitution requires a two-thirds vote of the Senate to convict, and the penalty for an impeached official upon conviction is removal from office.

[Gay State Conservative]

So has SCOTUS accepted the case...or are they in the process of deciding if they should take it?

[Eleutheria5]

Sounds like they are already having a hearing on the merits.