9th Circuit Court shoots down ‘anti-racist’ push to nix immigration law; 9th Circuit rules US deportation law that fueled family separations is ‘neutral as to race’

9th Circuit Court shoots down ‘anti-racist’ push to nix immigration law

A federal appeals court overturned a lower court ruling that had found a key section of immigration law to be tainted by racism, dealing a blow to “anti-racist” activists who see the case as a major test for cleansing the federal code of bigoted statutes.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Section 1326 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which makes it a felony to try to sneak back into the country after being deported, is not racist on its face, and wasn’t written with racist intent by Congress in the 1950s.

The three-judge panel overturned a ruling by District Judge Miranda M. Du, who had found the law’s origins to be racist and who had nixed a prosecution against an illegal immigrant who had been caught sneaking back in after a deportation.

“We hold that the district court clearly erred in its finding that Congress’s enactment of § 1326 was motivated in part by the purpose of discriminating against Mexicans or other Central and South Americans,” Circuit Court Judge Sandra S. Ikuta wrote for the unanimous appeals court.

The case grew out of a challenge by Gustavo Carrillo-Lopez, a Mexican who was deported in 1999 and again in 2012, the second time after earning a felony drug conviction and a misdemeanor spousal-abuse conviction.

He snuck in again, was found in 2019 with drugs and would plead guilty to drug trafficking. But in 2020 he was also charged with illegal entry with enhancements because of his other criminal record. —>READ MORE HERE

9th Circuit rules US deportation law that fueled family separations is ‘neutral as to race’:

A federal appeals court has ruled that a U.S. deportation law that fueled family separations at the southern border is “neutral as to race,” striking down an unprecedented Nevada ruling that had determined it was racist and unconstitutional.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals made that determination Monday in its long-awaited decision on the law known as Section 1326, which makes it a crime to unlawfully return to the U.S. after deportation, removal or denied entry.

The ruling is a blow for advocates who had hoped to see major changes to the nation’s immigration system after U.S. District Judge Miranda Du almost two years ago threw out an illegal reentry charge against a Mexican immigrant. Du said she dismissed the case on the grounds that Section 1326 of the Immigration and Nationality Act is discriminatory against Latinos and therefore violated Gustavo Carrillo-Lopez’s constitutional rights.

“We are deeply disappointed in the Ninth Circuit’s decision to uphold Section 1326, a discriminatory law that continues to fuel the mass incarceration of Black and brown people, waste government resources, and tear families apart,” Sirine Shebaya, executive director of the National Immigration Project, said in an emailed statement.

A federal public defender for Gustavo-Carrillo said she also was disappointed by the court’s ruling but declined to say whether she will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

“We intend to seek further review on this very important constitutional issue,” Amy Cleary said in a statement to The Associated Press. —>READ MORE HERE

Source