NEW
ARTICLES
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
VISA BULLETIN FOR
MARCH 2007
"This bulletin summarizes the availability of immigrant numbers
during March." DOS, Feb. 13, 2007.Immigrant
Wins in Drug Deportation Case
By
PETE YOST Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) _ The Supreme Court on Tuesday
made it easier for some immigrants convicted of drug possession under state law
to remain in the United States rather than being subject to deportation.
In
an 8-1 decision, the justices ruled in favor of an immigrant who pleaded guilty
to aiding and abetting possession of drugs in South Dakota for telling someone
where to obtain cocaine.
While such a crime is a felony in South Dakota, most
first-time simple possession offenses are punished as misdemeanors under the federal
Controlled Substances Act.
The issue before the Supreme Court was the interpretation
of the federal Immigration and Nationality Act, which says immigrants found guilty
of aggravated felonies are subject to deportation.
Conduct that is a felony
under state law but a misdemeanor under the Controlled Substances Act is not a
felony for purposes of immigration, stated the ruling by Justice David Souter.
Jose
Antonio Lopez, a 16-year permanent U.S. resident, was deported to Mexico in January
2006, but could return to his wife and two children, who are U.S. citizens, one
of his lawyers has said.
Even then, Lopez, who had operated a grocery store
in Sioux Falls, S.D., still could face deportation, but an immigration judge would
have discretion to allow him to remain in the United States.
In opposing the
immigrant's legal position, the Bush administration said that Congress left the
door open to counting state felonies as felonies under the federal Controlled
Substances Act, which would make them a crime that could trigger deportation under
the Immigration and Nationality Act.
''We do not normally speak or write the
government's way,'' Souter wrote, referring to the government's interpretation
of the law. ''Regular usage points in the other direction.''
Treating a misdemeanor
under the federal law as a felony ''would be so much trickery,'' Souter wrote.
Justice
Clarence Thomas dissented, declaring his colleagues' approach ''unpersuasive.
''
''Whatever else 'illicit trafficking' might mean'' in federal law, ''it
must include anything defined as a 'drug trafficking crime,'' Thomas said.
The
court dismissed the case of another immigrant whose case had been consolidated
with that of Lopez. The court said its decision to accept the case of Reymundo
Toledo-Flores had been improvidently granted.
Toledo-Flores is a Mexican national
who objected to having his latest conviction for illegally entering the United
States classified an aggravated felony. Toledo-Flores was contesting his prison
term, not his deportation, and he had already served it.
The cases are Lopez
v. Gonzales, 05-7664, and Toledo-Flores v. U.S., 05-493.