Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Barrett, J., delivered the (her first?) opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh, JJ., joined. Gorsuch, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Hmmm. Fill out an application for a driver’s license, make a mistake, by ticking the wrong box questioning citizenship, the state says you are still qualified to have a driver’s license. and the Feds throw you out of the country? There is a certain point where one says, this is entirely wrong to do and they refuse to do it. Justice Barrett does not appear to have the Moxy to just say “no, this is wrong.” Georgia Peach State prosecutors initially pressed charges. Later they found they were
Topics:
run75441 considers the following as important: law, Patel v. Garland, politics, SCOTUS
This could be interesting, too:
Angry Bear writes Texas Seniors Suddenly Lose Medicare Benefits
Joel Eissenberg writes Trump’s “Truth” Social meme stock plummets
Bill Haskell writes George Stephanopoulos asks New Hampshire governor Chris Sununu
Bill Haskell writes 59% of People Retaining Medicaid Coverage Were Renewed Through Ex Parte Processes
Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Barrett, J., delivered the (her first?) opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh, JJ., joined. Gorsuch, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined.
Hmmm. Fill out an application for a driver’s license, make a mistake, by ticking the wrong box questioning citizenship, the state says you are still qualified to have a driver’s license. and the Feds throw you out of the country?
There is a certain point where one says, this is entirely wrong to do and they refuse to do it. Justice Barrett does not appear to have the Moxy to just say “no, this is wrong.”
Georgia Peach State prosecutors initially pressed charges. Later they found they were lacking evidence to prove a crime had been committed. Notably, his incorrect check mark didn’t have any bearing on his request for a driver’s license because under Georgia law. Pankajkumar Patel was entitled to a driver’s license even though he was not a U.S. citizen. Pankajkumar had taken the necessary steps to be legal by filing for a green card. He already had a valid work permit.
SCOTUS ruled against immigrants seeking judicial review of mistakes and errors made by immigration agencies. In a 5-4 majority opinion, Justice Amy “Handmaid” Coney Barrett wrote (first opinion?) federal courts are categorically barred from considering such issues. Via Law & Crime.
Funny, nothing this minor has stopped the courts from other decisions. But then, this is not a church issue or a political issue. Not a bit of remorse?
“It is no secret that when processing applications, licenses, and permits the government sometimes makes mistakes,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in a passionate dissent. “Often, they are small ones – a misspelled name, a misplaced application. But sometimes a bureaucratic mistake can have life-changing consequences. Our case is such a case.”
Joined by Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, Gorsuch castigated the sweeping nature of the majority’s decision and its fealty to the administrative state.
“Today, the Court holds that a federal bureaucracy can make an obvious factual error, one that will result in an individual’s removal from this country, and nothing can be done about it,” the dissent notes. “No court may even hear the case. It is a bold claim promising dire consequences for countless lawful immigrants.”
For ~ 30 years Pankajkumar Patel kas been living in the US. In the case stylized as Patel v. Garland, Pankajkumar Patel accidentally ticks the wrong box on a driver’s license application question about his citizenship status in Georgia. And he is kicked out of the country.
They’re kicking him out of the country because of an oversight, even though he has three kids who live here. What a cruel, pointless decision. It’s good to be a SCOTUS Justice these days. Nothing that matters can touch you.