SCOTUS: States Can Prosecute Illegal Aliens for Stealing American IDs

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

 

Quote

 

In a 5-4 decision — with liberal Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan dissenting — the Supreme Court ruled against three illegal aliens who were prosecuted for stealing the identities of American citizens to work illegally in the state of Kansas.

Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Clarence Thomas, John Roberts, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch wrote in their majority opinion that states do have the authority to prosecute individuals for crimes that overlap with federal law.

The Justices wrote:

The mere fact that state laws like the Kansas provisions at issue overlap to some degree with federal criminal provisions does not even begin to make a case for conflict preemption. From the beginning of our country, criminal law enforcement has been primarily a responsibility of the States, and that remains true today. In recent times, the reach of federal criminal law has expanded, and there are now many instances in which a prosecution for a particular course of conduct could be brought by either federal or state prosecutors. Our federal system would be turned upside down if we were to hold that federal criminal law preempts state law whenever they overlap, and there is no basis for inferring that federal criminal statutes preempt state laws whenever they overlap. Indeed, in the vast majority of cases where federal and state laws overlap, allowing the States to prosecute is entirely consistent with federal interests. [Emphasis added]

 

 

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/03/03/scotus-states-can-prosecute-illegal-aliens-for-stealing-american-ids/

 

Seems like a rational approach which doesn't give states too much leverage to, say, try and impede the ability of ICE to carry out its duties in apprehending illegals. 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

My question is... why wasn't it a 9-0 vote?  Who thinks not prosecuting people for identity theft is a GOOD thing?

[Steeleballz 7,550]

55 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

My question is... why wasn't it a 9-0 vote?  Who thinks not prosecuting people for identity theft is a GOOD thing?

 

  I don't know about specific reasoning, but the argument itself was not about "not prosecuting" someone. Most of the case was centered around whether it could/should be done at the state level or at the federal level, and which level to follow if/when the law is either overlapping or inconsistent.