What's your opinion about this?

Question

Texas case is one of two being used to define how far punishments of immigrants can go
By PATTY REINERT
Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON - Possession of a small amount of cocaine is a misdemeanor under federal law. But in Texas, the crime is a felony — serious enough that it helped send Reymundo Toledo-Flores to prison for two years before he was deported to Mexico.

On Tuesday, the first day of arguments in the U.S. Supreme Court's 2006-07 term, the justices will consider Toledo-Flores' criminal case, along with that of a fellow Mexican national deported after a similar drug conviction in South Dakota. The issue before the court is whether the federal or the state view of the immigrants' crimes should be used to decide their prison sentences and the terms of their deportation proceedings.

To decide, the justices will need to clarify a federal immigration law that once was aimed at ridding the country of foreigners convicted of crimes such as rape and murder but increasingly is being used by immigration authorities to deport those charged with relatively minor offenses, including drug possession and shoplifting.

"The idea was that when immigrants commit really serious crimes, we didn't want them in the country," said Magali Candler, a Houston lawyer who chairs the regional chapter of the American Immigration Lawyers Association. "But over the years, the immigration laws have been amended repeatedly and now they are written so broadly that an immigrant who commits a minor crime, even if they never served a day in jail, can be deported."

Court records show that Toledo-Flores has repeatedly entered the United States illegally. He was deported last spring after serving his two-year sentence for felony illegal re-entry — a prison term that was lengthened because of his previous conviction in Harris County for possessing less than a gram of cocaine.

His lawyers are challenging his enhanced sentence before the Supreme Court, saying that because the drug possession charge would not be a felony under federal law, it should not have been used to increase Toledo-Flores' sentence on the re-entry conviction. If he wins, Toledo-Flores would gain nothing, but his case could help other immigrants charged with similar crimes fight their sentences and deportations.


The Lopez case

Answer 1

ILLEGALS are ALREADY criminals!!!! There should be NO question of them being arrested, and after serving time, they should be DEPORTED!!!!!

Answer 2

Any persons in the US illegally, regardless of ethnicity, should be deported.

Illegally entering any US state, is illegally entering the USA.

Any illegal who commits additional crime should get additional punishment, above the punishment for illegally entering the US.

Illegals who commit additional crimes and illegals that don't, have ALL violated the law and are all illegal. Furthermore, illegals should never get the same privileges that are afforded to Legal Citizens. Legal Citizens are involved in the whole system. Illegals however, want to "pick and choose" what parts of the system they like, take advantage of those laws and not follow other laws.


"The Supreme Court's ruling in Plyler v. Doe stated that illegal immigrants are "within the jurisdiction" of the states in which they reside."
"Use of the phrase "within its jurisdiction" thus does not detract from, but rather confirms, the understanding that the protection of the Fourteenth Amendment extends to anyone, citizen or stranger, who is subject to the laws of a State, and reaches into every corner of a State's territory. That a person's initial entry into a State, or into the United States, was unlawful, and that he may for that reason be expelled, cannot negate the simple fact of his presence within the State's territorial perimeter. Given such presence, he is subject to the full range of obligations imposed by the State's civil and criminal laws. And until he leaves the jurisdiction -- either voluntarily, or involuntarily in accordance with the Constitution and laws of the United States -- he is entitled to the equal protection of the laws that a State may choose to establish."

Thanks.

Answer 3

This is essentially why Peter Sellers' daughter is being deported too, it is a common policy. The only real question is the 'ex post facto' part to the extent deportation wasn't the result of committing a particular crime at the time it was committed. Even then, residency is long considered a 'privilege' not a right, so I don't think they will get anywhere.

I'll be interested to see the the court opinion.

Answer 4

The issue appears to be a conflict between state and federal statutes. As part of its opinion, the court will likely give guidance to both governments on amending or enforcing their laws.

Once the Supreme Court issues its decision, you and the legislatures will know what needs to be changed.

Answer 5

I think that people should write their city, state, and county officials, endorsing an illegal-unfriendly position. If you're in the United States illegally, you need to get right, or get out. Drug possession is a side-show, the issue is that we've got somewhere between 12 and 20 million illegal immigrants in our country. When it gets to the point where it's difficult if not impossible to 'sneak under the wire' in that regard, then we'll know the states are making progress in dealing with the problem.

Kudos to Congress for passing the border fence bill, it's a step in the right direction...

Answer 6

I am tempted to say why don't we re-classify him as a terrorist and deal with him under the new Bush Detainee act. That way we can legally torture him and find out how he manages to keep re-entering the country once deported.

In all seriousness, if we can't keep out these miscreants how in god's name can we keep out real terrorists who want to harm the country. How long is it going to take before some terrorist overlord figures that he might be able to coherce these undocumented workers to his cause.

Think about it? another worthless act of patriotic bigotry by the Bush administration in passing the detention bill.. Right?

Answer 7

I could care less, I am pretty sure the guy will win his case too, he shouldn't, considering he is an illegal immigrant and he is not supposed to be here anyways, but hey, what can you do? write your congressman or your senate, but nothing is going to change

Answer 8

Well if one of us goes to Mexico and disobeys Mexios laws we would get in alot of trouble. I believe they should be deported. It would set an example for the rest of the people who think they can come here and get away with doing illegal stuff. We have enough of our own criminals right here. I don't think anyone should go unpunished for drugs. Our young people are getting ahold of this stuff and it is having some bad effects on them and killing them.

Answer 9

Any way to send an illegal alien back to his/her home country if fine with me.

Murder is not a federal crime (in most cases). Wouldn't you send a murderer back to their home country when they get out?

Answer 10

I think the lawyers should go to prison with him, first off. He should be labelled a "repeat offender", because that's what he is.

Why is the word "illegal" so confusing?

Answer 11

Prosecute him according to whichever jurisdiction will give him max time, then boot his stupid a$% out of the country.