July 2, 2021
Are SCOTUS's three remaining reliable liberals clueless on immigration?
By Paul C. Binotto
"[W]hy would Congress want to deny a bond hearing to individuals who reasonably fear persecution or torture, and who, as a result, face proceedings that may last for many months or years (while their withholding-only proceedings wend their way toward completion)? I can find no satisfactory answer to this question."
A seemingly perplexed Justice Stephen Breyer wrote this (and was predictably joined in bewilderment by the Court's two other liberal justices, Sotomayor and Kagan) in his June 29 dissenting opinion in Johnson v. Guzman Chavez, the recent case in which the majority found that, in layman's terms, deported aliens who re-enter the U.S. illegally are not entitled to a bond hearing while they await their current adjudication.
In this case, as Breyer notes, pending the outcome of a so-called, "withholding-only proceeding," that determines whether an alien may be permitted to remain in the U.S. because, "returning [the alien] to his or her home country ... [poses] a reasonable fear of persecution or torture."
The answer wasn't at all allusive to Justice Samuel Alito, author of the majority opinion in this case, or the six other justices. "Congress had obvious reasons to treat these two groups differently," wrote Alito.
more
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/07/are_scotuss_three_remaining_reliable_liberals_clueless_on_immigration.html
