Our first ideological 6-3 of the day is in Guzman Chavez, the immigration detention case. Justice Alito writes for the Court except for a footnote. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…
This case is about whether certain aliens being detained after unlawful reentry while they seek limited relief from removal can get out of detention on bond.
Held: nope.
Held: nope.
Also, what's this footnote that couldn't get a majority?
Uhhhhh . . . whether the Court has jurisdiction.
Uhhhhh . . . whether the Court has jurisdiction.
The result is that on just the jurisdictional question, Justices Alito, Roberts, Kavanaugh, and Barrett plus dissenting justices Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan says the Court has jurisdiction.
Justices Thomas and Gorsuch disagree, but otherwise concur with the maj. op.
Justices Thomas and Gorsuch disagree, but otherwise concur with the maj. op.
There will be at least one more decision today.
Flipping back to Guzman Chavez, sadly no consistent STYLE TIP. Justice Alito's maj. op. and Justice Thomas' concurring op. generally use the word "alien."
Justice Breyer's dissent starts out using "noncitizen" except when quoting from statutes that use "alien," but then switches to "alien" throughout.
There is a push by certain jurists (and activists) to move away from using the word "alien" because they view it negatively.
"Noncitizen" is the variant currently encouraged, but that could change.
"Noncitizen" is the variant currently encouraged, but that could change.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
