Thread by @ReichlinMelnick

It always amuses me how confidently @RMConservative talks about immigration law while displaying how little he actually knows about it.

This article is journalistic malpractice. It gets the facts wrong, the background wrong, the law wrong, and the legal questions wrong.

https://twitter.com/JessicaV_CIS/status/1318208791335346179

Let's start with the facts he got wrong. Horowitz claims Pereida was convicted of "stealing the identity of a citizen" to get a job in Iowa.

Except he wasn't. The job was in Nebraska (despite biz having Iowa in name) and he was convicted of *attempted* "criminal impersonation."

Here's more of the sloppiness: Horowitz claims that "Even without stealing identity [sic], he came here illegally and should have no legal standing to remain in the country."

Except that's literally not how it works. For generations, Congress has created paths to avoid removal.

Here, he claims that there is 130-year precedent that immigrants can be deported "without interference from the courts," then provides a citation.

But that actual citation says no such thing. It says Congress sets the procedures and the executive branch must follow due process.

The whole article is infused with that kind of sloppy and inaccurate thinking.

Despite what @RMConservative wants to tell you, yes, undocumented immigrants are not only entitled to court hearings, but, *gasp* Congress has given them ways to stay in the United States legally!