Many people have survived a long and dangerous trip away from the savage violence in their countries of origin. This is about a boy who escaped militant Hezbollah soldiers and made his way to America. Donald Trump has. turned away as many immigrants as possible, sending them back to that brutality — including children. The Supreme Court (SCOTUS) had something to say about that.
Monday, the Supreme Court ruled that federal immigration laws that halted judicial deportation orders do not keep these immigrants from challenging their court outcomes.
Trump’s administration has been trying to send Nidal Nasrallah back to Lebanon. He belongs to a religious minority, the Druze, which is persecuted. He had been convicted of buying stolen cigarettes from undercover federal agents and was sentenced to a year in prison.in 2013. That was the only crime on the college graduate’s record.
In Lebanon, Hezbollah soldiers chased the 16-year-old boy to the edge of a cliff, and rather than being caught, he jumped. In doing so, he broke his spine. Since he came to the US, Nasrallah has been fighting deportation back to his home country, according to The Courthouse News Service.
He has been seeking to remain in the US under the Convention Against Torture Act (CAT). Trump does not have compassion, as his program to cage immigrant children shows, and his people have argued against Nasrallah. They claimed that he jumped off of the cliff voluntarily.
The Board of Immigration Appeals changed its deferral of removal after it decided “shouting and firing their guns in the air” was not torture. At that time, Nasrallah went to the 11th Circuit Court based in Atlanta and lost again. This court claimed
‘it was jurisdictionally barred from reviewing the immigrant’s vulnerability to torture.’
Nasrallah took his case to the Supreme Court, which made its decision Monday. It ruled 7-2 that the federal deportation law did not legally prevent a noncitizen from challenging a CAT order.
The 13-page majority opinion was written by the newest and a very conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh. It dismissed Trump’s argument that a Congressional law with CAT protections keeps deportees out of court. Kavanaugh wrote:
‘[A] CAT order is distinct from a final order of removal and does not affect the validity of a final order of removal.’
Kavanaugh wrote that it was “not the proper role” of SCOTUS to rewrite laws passed by Congress and signed by the president:
‘It would be easy enough for Congress to preclude judicial review of factual challenges to CAT orders, just as Congress has precluded judicial review of factual challenges to certain final orders of removal. But Congress has not done so, and it is not the proper role of the courts to rewrite the laws passed by Congress and signed by the President.’
Two Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented. Thomas wrote the opinion that they believed the majority was “upending Congress’ efforts” to keep the majority of immigration issues out of federal court:
‘As has been the case for decades now, the decisions of this Court continue to systematically chip away at this statute and other jurisdictional limitations on immigration claims, thus thwarting Congress’ intent.’
The Mueller Report Adventures: In Bite-Sizes on this Facebook page. These quick, two-minute reads interpret the report in normal English for busy people. Mueller Bite-Sizes uncovers what is essentially a compelling spy mystery. Interestingly enough, Mueller Bite-Sizes can be read in any order.