The liberal wing of the Supreme Court used the politically incorrect term “alien” during a case Tuesday that dealt with the Biden administration’s power to limit deportations that are required under federal law.
The case turned on a Biden administration order limiting Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) deportations to certain illegal immigrants.
SCOTS liberals use ‘alien’ terminology
While the liberal justices sided with the administration’s arguments, the justices adopted terminology discouraged by the administration and many Democrats, referring to illegals as “aliens” throughout two hours of arguments. Sonia Sotomayor used the term numerous times.
“What the record clearly proves is that there’s been a surge at the border; if left unattended, that surge would overwhelm all of the border states, not just Texas; and that the cost of doing that has to give them greater priorities in terms of aliens who are already here,” Sotomayor said.
Justice Elena Kagan also used the language while sparring with Texas Solicitor General Judd Stone on what immigration law requires of the federal government.
“If you look at the language of 1231, it’s the Attorney General ‘shall detain’ the alien. It doesn’t say anything about shall remove,” she said.
“Shall means shall”
Otherwise, the liberal justices agreed with Biden’s Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, who said Republican states lacked standing to bring the case at all.
Dismissing the enormous burdens of Biden’s border crisis as “speculative,” Kagan rebuked Stone for failing to weigh the “benefits” and fretted that Texas wanted to bring federal power over immigration to a “dead halt.” Ketanji Brown Jackson used the woke term “non-citizen” and questioned whether states are to blame if they feel “compelled” to arrest illegal immigrants who Biden will not.
Concerning the case’s merits, Prelogar argued that the federal government doesn’t have the resources to deport the millions of illegal immigrants living in the country, but Chief Justice John Roberts argued that wasn’t the Supreme Court’s concern.
“It’s our job to say what the law is, not whether or not it can be possibly implemented or whether there are difficulties there,” Roberts said.
Roberts argued that the laws are clear about the government’s obligation to deport illegals, saying, “shall means shall.” But Roberts and Brett Kavanaugh were also skeptical of the government’s enforcement capability, with Kavanaugh noting, “the resources are still not there.”