Just finished #SCOTUS decision in #Preap. Most impt: it says _nothing_ re whether incarceration of these immigrants w/o bond hearings is constitutional. So we live to fight another day, just as in Jennings v. Rodriguez. We're already planning! @ACLU @ACLU_SoCal #not1more
A few more thoughts in the weeds: 1. As @WangCecillia (who brilliantly argued the case) @matt_cam & others have noted, the opinion departs dramatically from the plain meaning of the word "when," which it reads to mean "any time after" rather than, well, "when." slip. op at 12.
2. It also reads the critical "when ... released" language to not apply _at all_ to the whole clause immediately preceding it - subsection D - because if it did apply, the Court's reading would make no sense. Slip. op at 24.
3. Courts sometimes adopt such odd readings, but here it claims its reading is the _only plausible reading_ of the statute. Why make that claim? Bc if the statute were ambiguous, the Court would have to consider the massive constitutional problems w imprisoning people w/o bond.
4. So, as in Rodriguez, the Court again contorts itself to avoid deciding whether our Constitution permits people to be imprisoned for years without the basic right to ask a judge for release on bond. Thousands of people will lose their liberty while waiting for the answer.
Share this Scrolly Tale with your friends.
A Scrolly Tale is a new way to read Twitter threads with a more visually immersive experience.
Discover more beautiful Scrolly Tales like this.