Only Alanis Morisette herself could pen the kind of ironic twist you're suggesting the Supreme Court is going to take in this case.
Expanding the due process protections of noncitizens, specifically where Khalil has already clearly and unequivocally been deemed a threat to national security by the Executive Branch, is something to write to Santa about --because it's simply not within the realm of any possible action the Supreme Court is going to take in the immediate future. The Court has held that when it comes to collecting evidence and drawing factual inferences in the area of national security, the lack of competence on the part of the courts is marked, and respect for the government's conclusions is appropriate. Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project (2010). Furthermore, Donald Trump has already been determined to wield broad discretion to suspend the entry of foreign nationals into the U.S. In Trump v. Hawaii (2018), the Court held that by entrusting the President the decisions of whether and when to suspend entry, whose entry to suspend, for how long, and on what conditions, Congress has vested the President with ample power to impose entry restrictions in addition to those elsewhere enumerated in the INA.
Moreover, why would the Supreme Court take an activist approach and strengthen Due Process protections when they could more easily allow the Legislature to run on full leash and abolish political participation for noncitizens in all forms? Other democratic nations around the world have already enshrined such prohibitions into their constitutions, including the right to express any political opinions whatsoever. (see and compare at: https://www.rightofassembly.info/).
Imagining that the Court is going to so much as poke at The Plenary Powers that grant Judicial deference to immigration policies devised by the legislative and executive branches - a bedrock dating back to the late 19th century - is as ludicrous as Trump's commercial annex of the Gaza strip --And yet far less likely to happen. (see: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/114068387897265338)
I do not anticipate the Supreme Court will split hairs here. Green Card holders will continue to be classified as non-citizens, undeserving of higher scrutiny, simple as that. And as much as I yearn for the Court to sign off with an ironic flourish to the matter - I will not hold my breath. I've got one hand in my pocket and the other one reaching for my bootstraps. This time from a sensical land, far far away.
Only Alanis Morisette herself could pen the kind of ironic twist you're suggesting the Supreme Court is going to take in this case.
Expanding the due process protections of noncitizens, specifically where Khalil has already clearly and unequivocally been deemed a threat to national security by the Executive Branch, is something to write to Santa about --because it's simply not within the realm of any possible action the Supreme Court is going to take in the immediate future. The Court has held that when it comes to collecting evidence and drawing factual inferences in the area of national security, the lack of competence on the part of the courts is marked, and respect for the government's conclusions is appropriate. Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project (2010). Furthermore, Donald Trump has already been determined to wield broad discretion to suspend the entry of foreign nationals into the U.S. In Trump v. Hawaii (2018), the Court held that by entrusting the President the decisions of whether and when to suspend entry, whose entry to suspend, for how long, and on what conditions, Congress has vested the President with ample power to impose entry restrictions in addition to those elsewhere enumerated in the INA.
Moreover, why would the Supreme Court take an activist approach and strengthen Due Process protections when they could more easily allow the Legislature to run on full leash and abolish political participation for noncitizens in all forms? Other democratic nations around the world have already enshrined such prohibitions into their constitutions, including the right to express any political opinions whatsoever. (see and compare at: https://www.rightofassembly.info/).
Imagining that the Court is going to so much as poke at The Plenary Powers that grant Judicial deference to immigration policies devised by the legislative and executive branches - a bedrock dating back to the late 19th century - is as ludicrous as Trump's commercial annex of the Gaza strip --And yet far less likely to happen. (see: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/114068387897265338)
I do not anticipate the Supreme Court will split hairs here. Green Card holders will continue to be classified as non-citizens, undeserving of higher scrutiny, simple as that. And as much as I yearn for the Court to sign off with an ironic flourish to the matter - I will not hold my breath. I've got one hand in my pocket and the other one reaching for my bootstraps. This time from a sensical land, far far away.