A Student Planned a Mass Shooting at This University Before Police Stopped Him
Did Russia Just Threaten War Against the European Union?
Gavin Newsom's Latest Move Shows That He's Definitely Running for President
Democrats Really Thought They Were Doing Something With This Epstein 'Reveal'
Elise Stefanik Drops the Hammer on Hochul As NY Prepares to Parole Yet...
Guess Why Jim Acosta Thinks Trump Should Be Impeached Now
Dem Narrative Collapses As Official IG Report on Secretary of War Pete Hegseth...
Minnesota's Lt. Governor Peggy Flanagan Thinks Somali Fraud Is Part of the 'Fabric'...
Ilhan Omar Was Asked About Minnesota's Fraud Problem. Her Answer Is Stunning.
Erika Kirk Stands by Second Amendment After Charlie's Assassination: Not a Gun Problem
Trump Signals Strongest Support Yet for Abolishing Federal Income Tax
Trump Orders Flags to Half Staff for Murdered Army Specialist Sarah Beckstrom
Josh Shapiro Blasts Kamala Harris Over Lies: 'She's Trying to Sell Books and...
Jaguar Fires Creative Chief Behind Disastrous Woke Rebrand
Jeffrey Epstein’s Sexual Scandals Are Distractions From the Real Threats
Tipsheet

SCOTUS: Repeat Illegal Immigrants Ineligible for Bond While Fighting Deportation

AP Photo/Daniel Ochoa de Olza

In a decision announced Tuesday morning, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 against a subset of illegal immigrants on the question of whether they are entitled to bond hearings while fighting deportation, reversing the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Advertisement

The majority opinion in Johnson v. Guzman Chavez — a narrow case questioning whether previously deported individuals who reenter the United States illegally over fears of torture in their home country must be detained while their second removal proceedings take place — was authored by Justice Samuel Alito. He was joined by Justices Roberts, Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett. Justices Breyer, Kagan, and Sotomayor dissented.

Johnson v. Guzman Chavez dealt with two provisions authorizing authorities to detail illegal immigrants while remove proceedings take place: 8 U.S.C. §1226 and 8 U.S.C. §1231 and which one applied to illegal aliens who were deported once but returned illegally a second time. "If the answer is §1226, which applies 'pending a decision on whether the alien is to be removed from the United States,' then the alien may receive a bond hearing before an immigration judge," Alito writes. "If the answer is §1231, which applies after the alien is 'ordered removed,' then the alien is not entitled to a bond hearing."

"We conclude that §1231, not §1226, governs the detention of aliens subject to reinstated orders of removal, meaning those aliens are not entitled to a bond hearing while they pursue withholding of removal."

Advertisement

Related:

DEPORTATION

Among other issues outlined in his opinion, Alito found respondents' arguments "would undermine Congress's judgment regarding the detention of different groups of aliens who posed different risks of flight." As the syllabus for the case explains, "Aliens who have not been ordered removed are less likely to abscond because they have a chance of being found admissible, while aliens who have already been ordered removed are generally inadmissible... and have already demonstrated a willingness to violate the terms of a removal order."

In layman's terms, those who have already been deported from the United States and return illegally a second time are more likely to disappear if released on bond.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement