Supreme Court rules immigrants can be detained indefinitely

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.

In a 5-3 ruling Tuesday, with Justice Elena Kagan recusing, the court ruled that immigrants do not have the right to periodic bond hearings.

The ruling is a defeat for immigration advocates, who argued that immigrants should not be held for more than six months at a time without such a hearing.

Source

So with this move it means that even people who are legally in this country can be held indefinitely. I don't know how anyone can justify this decision. Just because someone is from a different country they are no longer afforded basic human rights.

What's to stop this ruling being used to justify internment camps? Hell, what's to stop this ruling from being used as precedent for a similar case against US citizens? This just seems like the start of a slippery slope.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

After the Patriot Act, this doesn't come as much of a surprise.

The government found a loophole on any rights we once had.

a reply to: Xcalibur254


Whole I agree that this shouldn't be done to people here LEGALLY.......

If you're here illegally, you have zero rights that would be afforded to a citizen or a legal immigrant.


So, I agree with you, on half of your stance.

originally posted by: FHomerK
a reply to: Xcalibur254


Whole I agree that this shouldn't be done to people here LEGALLY.......

If you're here illegally, you have zero rights that would be afforded to a citizen or a legal immigrant.


So, I agree with you, on half of your stance.

How do you determine if they are here legally if there is no hearing and they are just being held?


From the Source:

"Immigration officials are authorized to detain certain aliens in the course of immigration proceedings while they determine whether those aliens may be lawfully present in the country," Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the majority opinion.

a reply to: FHomerK

If you're here illegally, you have zero rights that would be afforded to a citizen or a legal immigrant.

That's simply not true, and shouldn't be true.

So some kids parents make the decision for them they're sneaking to America.... And that person had no decision is just screwed out of any rights or decency? That doesn't reflect a country of freedom.

You want to say deport illegals? I can't really argue with law, but to say someone has no right to go home and can be held indefinitely is just sick... It also doesn't reflect true concervative beliefs as that's just hemorrhaging money by paying to incarcerate people.

Our world is shaping up to be a version of hell.

This can not stand.

Wake up again people.
now death camps are legal
they want to jack boot our kids in the name of saftey
it would not surprise me if the court rules next that no one has any rights unless granted by the new masters.

someone needs to put the dog or cat back on the leash

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Wow, talk about opening a Pandora's Box of potential problems!

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Why did one justice recuse?

I hope it was not because she is an immigrant.


www.scotusblog.com...

The fate of a high-profile challenge to the prolonged detention of immigrants facing deportation without a bond hearing appeared less certain tonight, with the announcement – made over a month after oral argument – that Justice Elena Kagan would no longer participate in the case. In a letter sent to lawyers for the two sides in Jennings v. Rodriguez, Scott Harris – the clerk of the Supreme Court – indicated that Kagan had learned only today that “while serving as Solicitor General, she authorized the filing of a pleading in an earlier phase” of the case.

sounds like they tied her hands for no real reason

a reply to: howtonhawky

Interesting, but wouldn't have made a difference. The most she could've done was make it a 5-4 decision.

This is crazy if you ask me.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

People will say "illegal is illegal", while living in a country where the laws you have to follow depend on how much money you have.

It must be Tuesday.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: FHomerK

If you're here illegally, you have zero rights that would be afforded to a citizen or a legal immigrant.

That's simply not true, and shouldn't be true.

So some kids parents make the decision for them they're sneaking to America.... And that person had no decision is just screwed out of any rights or decency? That doesn't reflect a country of freedom.

You want to say deport illegals? I can't really argue with law, but to say someone has no right to go home and can be held indefinitely is just sick... It also doesn't reflect true concervative beliefs as that's just hemorrhaging money by paying to incarcerate people.

Then I would say the best thing to do would be to just deport them while their status is determined. Then if they are found to have a favorable immigration status they can return if they so choose.

This will ensure no criminal aliens are released back into the public to victimize American citizens.

a reply to: watchitburn

I won't argue with that. Laws are laws, but allowing for indefinite imprisonment without a hearing is not American. I don't want us to be know for that ever, whether you're a citizen or not.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Am I interpreting this correctly in that even the naturalized can be bent over and violated without the courtesy of lube? My husband's a naturalized immigrant, did his "duty" in the military, too. Great way to thank him, he literally broke his back for the trouble of serving. Now this is a possibility? I don't see how serving could have been worth it in hindsight if that's what the naturalized soldiers have to look forward to the potential of, no matter how remote.

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: howtonhawky

Interesting, but wouldn't have made a difference. The most she could've done was make it a 5-4 decision.

This is crazy if you ask me.

sometimes hindsight is not 20/20

i see your point and raise the argument

get it her opinion on the matter could have swayed other votes

originally posted by: howtonhawky

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: howtonhawky

Interesting, but wouldn't have made a difference. The most she could've done was make it a 5-4 decision.

This is crazy if you ask me.

sometimes hindsight is not 20/20

i see your point and raise the argument

get it her opinion on the matter could have swayed other votes

Theoretically sure, but I'd bet they've all discussed it with her and were aware of her opinion. They see these cases coming months, sometimes years in advance, and they spend a lot of time together. I'd have a hard time believing it never came up even in casual conversation before she recused herself.

I say we put them all into these areas where we can keep an eye on them while we hold them for months or years. Let's not call them camps, I think areas sound better. And we can get Halliburton KBR to build them all!

That way all the supporters who despise immigrants are happy and all the owners who are running this charade of a country make money too... win/win!

This is really disgusting, shamed to be American right now considering how far this country has fallen below it's founding ideals & aspirations.

You see how they're separating mothers & children.

That's some Nazi / Communist level evil right there, sickening to so many "Americans" champion this vile behavior.

K~

originally posted by: aethertek
This is really disgusting, shamed to be American right now considering how far this country has fallen below it's founding ideals & aspirations.

You see how they're separating mothers & children.

That's some Nazi / Communist level evil right there, sickening to so many "Americans" champion this vile behavior.

K~

Human Rights evidently don't mean s# here. They only do when we browbeat other countries with it as a means of manipulation.

We've devolved into the pile of feces the Right claims to be against. You start with the legal immigrants, and it's only a damned matter of time before they concoct some excuse to do the same bull to the born citizens. Mark my words.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

The court system is still involved and it only applies to immigrants (legal or illegal).

originally posted by: howtonhawky

now death camps are legal

Thats not jumping conclusions or fear mongering at all.