Two recent cases in federal courts, one in the Supreme Court and the other in a Chicago federal appeals court, demonstrate how the courts can limit the power of the Trump Administration to carry out its severe crackdown on illegal immigration.
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court rejected an argument that has been used to justify deportations for immigrants convicted of felonies. Justice Neil Gorsuch, the Justice nominated by President Trump, was the deciding vote. He felt that the federal law dictating deportation for those guilty of “a crime of violence” is too vague, and that “a government of laws and not of men can never tolerate that arbitrary power.”
In Chicago, a federal appeals court denied a request from Attorney General Jeff Sessions for cities to hand over detained immigrants for deportation as a condition to be eligible for certain crime-fighting grants. Judge Ilana Rovner, a judge appointed by Republican President George H.W. Bush, wrote that Congress did not include any immigration enforcement conditions when they authorized the federal grant funds, and as such the Department of Justice could not create any such condition.
VERDICT: One of President Trump’s larges legacies will be the number of judges he has appointed to the courts. Despite the inevitable partisan bias of the judges being appointed to the courts, judges still operate under the rule of law.
As such, it is refreshing to see judges appointed by conservative presidents maintaining their judicial integrity in pushing back against the executive branch’s attempts to expand their authority in their illegal immigration crackdown.