Supreme Court Green-Lights Third-Country Deportations: "You Can't Stay Here"

You know, here is the simplest way to understand what the Supreme Court of the United States just did.

America gets to enforce its American immigration law, but even the president has to operate within the immigration laws that Congress wrote.

That's the constitutional issue underneath all of this noise.

And basically what this all has to do with is that the president now has all of the barriers or the appeals that have prevented him from deporting illegal immigrants to third party countries.

In other words, countries where they are not from.

Right.

Originally.

Yep.

And I think, and I know we may be talking about this later on, but the question is, who gets the constitutional authority to decide whether a foreign national may remain in the United States? I mean, it begins with the United States, not France, not Guatemala, not the South Sudan, not the United Nations, but the United States.

And I think that is what is really at the heart here.

And yes, the Supreme Court is going to take this up, take this case up about whether or not what the Trump administration has been doing or has been using in terms of these third country removal or removals.

And it sounds complicated.

It really isn't.

But, you know, suppose somebody is ordered removed from the United States.

Now, normally you might assume that person simply goes back to his home country.

Sometimes that can't happen.

Maybe the home country refuses to accept him.

Maybe there are diplomatic relations that make return difficult.

Maybe there are other legal obstacles.

So the government attempts to remove that person to a third country somewhere other than his country of nationality.

Right.

Well, what if that, you know, there are a lot of folks that say that's not right, that's inhumane, that, you know, we shouldn't be able to do that.

And the Supreme Court has blocked several cases, you know, in terms of those with criminal convictions, you know, including aggravated assault and serious drug offenses, right? I mean— But immigration advocates would say, wait a minute, if you're going to deport somebody to a country where he believes he's going to be tortured, I mean, what if it's somewhere that he's going to face persecution? What if he says, if you send me there, they're going to kill me? And I think the question is, is that really what's going on here? And the question is, who gets to decide the constitutional authority to deport those who aren't legally in this country?

Well, I think this falls to the executive branch.

The Supreme Court just issued a ruling that will allow the Trump administration to continue deporting illegal aliens to third countries.

You know, here is the simplest way to understand what the Supreme Court of the United States just did.

America gets to enforce its American immigration law, but even the president has to operate within the immigration laws that Congress wrote.

That's the constitutional issue underneath all of this noise.

And basically what this all has to do with is that the president now has all of the barriers or the appeals that have prevented him from deporting illegal immigrants to third party countries.

In other words, countries where they are not from.

Right.

Originally.

Yep.

And I think, and I know we may be talking about this later on, but the question is, who gets the constitutional authority to decide whether a foreign national may remain in the United States? I mean, it begins with the United States, not France, not Guatemala, not the South Sudan, not the United Nations, but the United States.

And I think that is what is really at the heart here.

And yes, the Supreme Court is going to take this up, take this case up about whether or not what the Trump administration has been doing or has been using in terms of these third country removal or removals.

And it sounds complicated.

It really isn't.

But, you know, suppose somebody is ordered removed from the United States.

Now, normally you might assume that person simply goes back to his home country.

Sometimes that can't happen.

Maybe the home country refuses to accept him.

Maybe there are diplomatic relations that make return difficult.

Maybe there are other legal obstacles.

So the government attempts to remove that person to a third country somewhere other than his country of nationality.

Right.

Well, what if that, you know, there are a lot of folks that say that's not right, that's inhumane, that, you know, we shouldn't be able to do that.

And the Supreme Court has blocked several cases, you know, in terms of those with criminal convictions, you know, including aggravated assault and serious drug offenses, right? I mean— But immigration advocates would say, wait a minute, if you're going to deport somebody to a country where he believes he's going to be tortured, I mean, what if it's somewhere that he's going to face persecution? What if he says, if you send me there, they're going to kill me? And I think the question is, is that really what's going on here? And the question is, who gets to decide the constitutional authority to deport those who aren't legally in this country?

Well, I think this falls to the executive branch.

The Supreme Court just issued a ruling that will allow the Trump administration to continue deporting illegal aliens to third countries.