Court Rules for Immigrant in DUI Case (Rehnquist opinion)

WASHINGTON -- A drunk driving accident is not a "crime of violence" allowing the government to deport a permanent resident, the Supreme Court ruled Tuesday in the first of three cases this term delineating the rights of immigrants.

In an 11-page opinion by ailing Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, the court ruled unanimously in favor of Josue Leocal, a Florida man challenging his deportation to Haiti in 2002 after pleading guilty to a felony charge of drunk driving.

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the DUI offense was a "crime of violence" under the immigration statute because he had caused injury to others.

The Supreme Court disagreed. It said the plain meaning of the statute suggests that the felony offense must require intent in causing harm -- not mere negligence as in Leocal's case -- before immigrants are subject to the drastic consequence of deportation.

http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-scotus-immigration,0,5956257.story?coll=sns-ap-politics-headlines

No wonder they have to get rid of him.

that intent thing is soooo...constructionist...yeah, that's the term. how dare they rule on intent...oh wait...they all did...

i think this is what we're in for with respect to the supreme court for the next umpteen years.

j

OMG, hell has frozen over!

One of the advantages of being Chief Justice is that if you are on the Majority (And in this case the decision was unanimous) you can write the opinion AND MINIMIZE OR MAXIMIZE the effect of the Decision.

Rehnquist has this all through his time as Chief Justice, writing opinions for the Court where he can maximize the Conservative point of view OR minimize the Liberal Point of view. He is notorious for this in 6-3 decisions (In many such 6-3 decisions it appears he switched sides to the prevailing side so he could write the opinion).

I have not yet read the opinion to see if that is the situation in this case but here is the opinion if you want to read it yourself:
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/09nov20041130/www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/04pdf/03-583.pdf