You’d think that if anyone was ripe for prosecution it would be a non-citizen who returned to the country after having been deported for some other crime. But not if you’re Miranda Du, chief judge of the U.S. District Court of Nevada.
According to CBS Las Vegas affiliate KLAS, on Wednesday Du, an Obama appointee, ruled that a federal statute outlawing re-entry into the U.S. by people who have been previously deported is unconstitutional. The law in question is found in Section 1326 of the Immigration and Nationality Act and makes it a crime for a person to enter the U.S. if they have been denied admission, deported or removed.
So what, in Du’s opinion, makes this law unconstitutional? She argues that it discriminates against Hispanics.
Will this presidential election be the most important in American history?
The 43-page ruling came in a case involving Gustavo Carrillo-Lopez, who was indicted last year. He was originally deported in March 1999.
Lawyers for Carrillo-Lopez argued that the law disproportionately targeted “Latinx individuals.”
Du’s ruling cited racist origins tied to laws previously passed in 1929 and 1952. The “racial animus” that motivated earlier laws has not been erased by years of renewing laws based on a biased legal foundation, the court ruled.
The article goes on to note that the Department of Justice has not yet indicated whether it would appeal the ruling, though it appears a strong argument could be made for overturning Du’s decree. Consider a report by the Migration Policy Institute, a left-leaning think tank, that reveals that 67% of all illegal aliens in the U.S. come from Latin countries. More than half come from Mexico alone.
Making the case for discrimination when two thirds of all indictments are of people of Hispanic extraction seems like a steep climb.
