A real mean prick is BK.
Case revolves around question of whether the feds have to detain immigrants who’d committed crimes (even and usually minor ones) irrespective of how long ago they were released from criminal custody… Kavanaugh said detention was/is required even years later. Saying congress wanted HARSHNESS
link: www.nytimes.com/...
But Justice Gorsuch suggested that mandatory detentions of immigrants long after they completed their sentences could be problematic. “Is there any limit on the government’s power?” he asked. Justice Stephen G. Breyer pressed the point, asking a lawyer for the federal government whether it could detain “a person 50 years later, who is on his death bed, after stealing some bus transfers” without a bail hearing “even though in this country a triple ax murderer is given a bail hearing.”
The lawyer, Zachary D. Tripp, hedged, and Justice Gorsuch grew frustrated. “Mr. Tripp, we’re quibbling,” Justice Gorsuch said. “Justice Breyer’s question is my question, and I really wish you’d answer it.”
BK agrees w Tripp.
In April, Justice Gorsuch joined the court’s four liberal members in a 5-to-4 decision striking down a law that allowed the government to deport some immigrants who had committed serious crimes, saying it was unconstitutionally vague. Some of his questions on Wednesday in the new case, Nielsen v. Preap, No. 16-1363, left open the possibility of a similar alliance.
We shall see.
