News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and Laptops Unconstitutional. Parent comment

Re:Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and La... by arcticbull on Tuesday November 12, 2019 @05:20PM (#21518821)
This follows logically, in my opinion, from the idea that the federal government is solely responsible for matters of immigration law. You don't want to create a patchwork of different rules in different states based on presence granted and retracted at the sole discretion of the federal government. Once you're on US soil, you're largely treated the same as anyone else on US soil (or at least through the same framework), and that makes sense. If you should be removed, that's up to the Feds. To the extent you're not, you should be treated consistently.

You are of course correct that the rules do not apply evenly for immigrants and nonimmigrants, especially since nonimmigrants convicted of a crime are largely seen out as soon as their sentence is served. The same isn't true of immigrants.

Mostly.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and La... by xyzzyz on Tuesday November 12, 2019 @05:26PM (#21518886)
This follows logically, in my opinion, from the idea that the federal government is solely responsible for matters of immigration law.

This argument makes sense, but I think it proves too much: states already have plenty of laws that restrict certain rights or privileges to citizens only. Your argument, as I understand it, is that since immigration status is a matter of federal law, states cannot deny a right (to K-12 education) on the basis of immigration status -- but it is commonly accepted that they can and do deny such a right in other circumstances, e.g. to serve as a police officer, for example, which I'm quite sure state laws deny to illegal immigrants.

are largely seen out as soon as their sentence is served

What do you mean by "seen out", exactly?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and La... by arcticbull on Tuesday November 12, 2019 @05:38PM (#21518986)
> What do you mean by "seen out", exactly?

Committing a crime of moral turpitude as a non-immigrant (and even some green card holders) makes you eligible for deportation. [1]

[1] https://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/us-immigration/legal-re...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and La... by bryanrasmussen on Tuesday November 12, 2019 @07:09PM (#21519676)
Some years ago (as I remember this) it was allowed to deport any non-citizen who had committed a crime that could lead to a year or more incarceration - is that no longer the case?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and La... by arcticbull on Tuesday November 12, 2019 @08:27PM (#21520289)
It's probably more stringent now heh.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and La... by ta0987 on Tuesday November 12, 2019 @07:37PM (#21519910)
e.g. to serve as a police officer

You can't legally work in any job as an illegal immigrant - it's a Federal law: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1324a

[ Parent | on HN ]