Reply With Quoteit's about time we had a new look at schenck-v-united-states, probably the worst 1st Amendment ruling we've had ever. It should also make ALL people consider the courts as corrupt.
Malarkeyville
Law against encouraging illegal immigration could violate First Amendment
Law against encouraging illegal immigration could violate First AmendmentA 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel asked federal public defenders and immigrant rights groups to submit amicus briefs arguing that a San Jose, California, woman was improperly convicted because the law is vague or overbroad.
By JOSH GERSTEIN 09/19/2017 12:12 AM EDT
A federal law that makes it a crime to encourage or induce foreigners to enter or stay in the U.S. illegally may run afoul of the First Amendment, a federal appeals court suggested in an unusual order Monday.
Immigration consultant Evelyn Sineneng-Smith was convicted at a jury trial in 2013 of inducing foreigners from the Philippines to stay in the U.S. unlawfully by charging them to file labor and immigration petitions that had no chance of winning the immigrants legal status.
At oral arguments in April on Sineneng-Smith's appeal, all three 9th Circuit judges expressed concerns about the government's position that someone could be convicted under the statute, which makes it illegal to encourage or induce "an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law."
"What is the limit of this statute?" Judge Marsha Berzon asked. "If I have a neighbor and he's illegal, and he comes to me and says, 'Should I stay or should I leave? What should I do?' and I say, 'Stay, because they're probably not going to find you,' is that a crime? ... Encourage is a pretty loose word; what does it mean?"
A 9th Circuit ruling in the defendant's favor could complicate the Trump administration's effort to step up prosecutions for those who aid illegal immigrants, although it's possible other statutes could be used to file such cases.
However, at the oral argument session, Judge Stephen Reinhardt said a literal reading of the criminal law in Sineneng-Smith's case could put lawyers in jeopardy for giving legal advice.
"What if a lawyer says to a client. ... This is before the era of Trump, as our attorney general puts it. ... If before that era a client goes to a lawyer and says, 'I've overstayed. I've been here 20 years. What should I do?' And the lawyer says, 'Well, no sane country is going to try to deport 11 million people so ... if i were you, I would do nothing. I would go back and continue to lead my life.' Is that lawyer guilty of a crime?" Reinhardt asked.
Judge Wallace Tashima also chimed in, raising concerns about the lack of a clear intent requirement.
Prosecutor Susan Gray said how the intent requirement was parsed was of little significance because of overwhelming evidence that Sineneng-Smith was ripping people off. A judge sentenced Sineneng-Smith to 18 months in prison and six months of home confinement, but she has remained free on bond while the appeal went forward.
President Donald Trump and UN Ambassador Nikki Haley are pictured. | Getty Images
WHITE HOUSE
Haley's former chief of staff to join Trump's legal team
By ELIANA JOHNSON
"The fraud here wasn't a fraud on the government; it was a fraud on the clients," Gray said. "She did it for one reason only. She did it for greed."
Defense attorney Daniel Cook said Sineneng-Smith knew the clients could not get all the way through the process of legalization due to the changes in the law. However, he insisted that the labor applications were legitimate steps that could help the clients if the law changed. He said the information in the applications was accurate and disclosed that the applicants had been in the country illegally for years.
"Ms. Sineneng-Smith surfaced these people who were hidden," Cook said.
Berzon said she was troubled by the use of the encouraging-or-inducing-illegal-immigration law if the government's real complaint was fraud. She compared the situation to prosecutors' broad claims several years ago of "honest services fraud" — a theory reined in by the Supreme Court.
Donald Trump is pictured here. | AP Photo
White House says it will lay out immigration priorities in 7 to 10 days
By MADELINE CONWAY
"It sounds like what this person did was exploitative and so on. ... There are statutes to deal with it," Berzon said.
The judges seemed frustrated with the arguments but took no action on the case until they issued the order Monday seeking amicus briefs within 30 days. The appeals court did not indicate whether it plans to hold new arguments in the case.
Reinhardt is a Jimmy Carter appointee. Berzon and Tashima are appointees of Bill Clinton.
Spokespeople for the Justice Department and for the U.S. Attorney's Office in San Francisco did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Cook, Sineneng-Smith's lawyer, did not respond to phone and email messages seeking comment.
"There is no question former President Trump bears moral responsibility. His supporters stormed the Capitol because of the unhinged falsehoods he shouted into the world’s largest megaphone," McConnell wrote. "His behavior during and after the chaos was also unconscionable, from attacking Vice President Mike Pence during the riot to praising the criminals after it ended."
rebel
it's about time we had a new look at schenck-v-united-states, probably the worst 1st Amendment ruling we've had ever. It should also make ALL people consider the courts as corrupt.
A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.
Banned
You consider anything you disagree with or don't like as corrupt. That means you ASSume everything you believe is the only way things should be done.Originally Posted by SmarterthanYou
rebel
you've lost your way of freedom and the constitution. that's ok. the GOP has done serious damage to the nations values and sense of right and wrong, just as much as the democrats and the left. you don't need to feel ashamed that you've swallowed uncle sams koolaid, many others are just like you. I look forward to your awakening though. and yes, I am exactly right in everything I have said.
A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.
Banned
The only thing you are is an arrogant coward. Your kind is easy to spot and easier to handle.
rebel
says the one who demands the government ensure their safety. I think you need to take a closer look at just who the coward is.
A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.
911 EVERY DAY
Schenck v. United States has already been overturned since by rulings that established more liberal standards for the protection of free speech. Current law is Brandenburg v. Ohio if I am correct:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio
"Do not think that I came to bring peace... I did not come to bring peace, but a sword." - Matthew 10:34
dukkha (09-20-2017)
rebel
to a certain extent, yes, because it could be argued that advocating illegal immigration is advocating lawless action. an act that brandenburg did NOT overturn.
A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.
Biden likes little girls
If you don't like a law then go to congress and ask them to change it. Liberals won't do that since they know the law makes all the sense in the world and congress won't change it. So they ask the unelected courts to change the law even though the constitution says "all legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a congress of the united states".
Reckless drivers are a bigger threat to you than all other criminals put together!
THE BIG LIE - Blacks and whites are different physically but identical mentally!
There is no way 81 million americans voted for a man they know is a child molester w dementia. Impeach Joe the Pedophile Vegetable (JPV)
FUCK THE POLICE (09-21-2017)
The Sage of Main Street (09-19-2017)
Biden likes little girls
So what happened to stare decisis??
Reckless drivers are a bigger threat to you than all other criminals put together!
THE BIG LIE - Blacks and whites are different physically but identical mentally!
There is no way 81 million americans voted for a man they know is a child molester w dementia. Impeach Joe the Pedophile Vegetable (JPV)
Biden likes little girls
The law against encouraging illegals to live here (section 1324 of title 8) should be used to overturn plyler v doe, where the supreme court ordered all states to provide free k-12 to illegals. That is certainly encouragement.
Reckless drivers are a bigger threat to you than all other criminals put together!
THE BIG LIE - Blacks and whites are different physically but identical mentally!
There is no way 81 million americans voted for a man they know is a child molester w dementia. Impeach Joe the Pedophile Vegetable (JPV)
The Sage of Main Street (09-19-2017)
Malarkeyville
In post #9 you were complaining about the unelected changing laws & here you are in post #11 advocating the unelected overturn "plyler v doe"........
"There is no question former President Trump bears moral responsibility. His supporters stormed the Capitol because of the unhinged falsehoods he shouted into the world’s largest megaphone," McConnell wrote. "His behavior during and after the chaos was also unconscionable, from attacking Vice President Mike Pence during the riot to praising the criminals after it ended."
Verified User
do i need to read any further??A 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
Biden likes little girls
Plyler v doe is NOT a law you fool. It's a court ruling that should have applied in just that one special case. Instead the SC in 1982 declared their ruling was now "the law of the land" and applied throughout the country!! The constitution says only congress can write laws. THINKIn post #9 you were complaining about the unelected changing laws & here you are in post #11 advocating the unelected overturn "plyler v doe"........
Reckless drivers are a bigger threat to you than all other criminals put together!
THE BIG LIE - Blacks and whites are different physically but identical mentally!
There is no way 81 million americans voted for a man they know is a child molester w dementia. Impeach Joe the Pedophile Vegetable (JPV)
Mjölner
Well he sure told you, Bill.
All you had to do was THINK. LOL
It is the responsibility of every American citizen to own a modern military rifle.
Phantasmal (09-20-2017)
Posting Rules
Bookmarks