Author Topic: Human Traffickers and Immigration Fraudsters Have a Consistent Ally: The Radical Ninth Circuit  (Read 175 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rangerrebew

  • TBR Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 165,455
Human Traffickers and Immigration Fraudsters Have a Consistent Ally: The Radical Ninth Circuit
December 19, 2022
 
Michael CapuanoMichael Capuano
Researcher/Staff Writer
In 2020, the Supreme Court handed down a decision, in U.S. v. Sineneng Smith, affirming that it is a crime to encourage illegal immigration. The ruling reversed a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision that, in SCOTUS’s view, had acted prematurely. If the Ninth Circuit’s decision had remained in force, an important law that allows punishment for criminal scammers who routinely destroy others’ lives would have been struck down. Unfortunately for the Americans and foreigners victimized by these scammers, activist lawyers seem determined to let them defraud the public freely and the issue is headed to the highest court once again.

The statute at issue is 8 U.S.C. §1324(a)(1)(A)(iv), which makes it a crime for any person to encourage or induce an alien to come to or live in the U.S. while knowing or recklessly ignoring that the alien would be violating the law by doing so. Both Sineneng and the new case now before the Supreme Court, U.S. v. Hansen, involve people convicted under this law: Ms. Sineneng-Smith stole $3.3 million from clients who had no chance at legal status, while Mr. Hansen took in $1.8 million falsely promising lawful status through adult adoptions. Unlike in Sineneng, Hansen himself challenged the law’s constitutionality on appeal and set up the current Supreme Court showdown. How could a law that addresses such obviously criminal behavior be unconstitutional?
 
https://www.immigrationreform.com/2022/12/19/human-traffickers-and-immigration-fraudsters-have-a-consistent-ally-the-radical-ninth-circuit/
« Last Edit: December 26, 2022, 06:28:05 pm by rangerrebew »
The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.
Thomas Jefferson