US Supreme Court examines law against encouraging illegal immigration

  • 📰 Reuters
  • ⏱ Reading Time:
  • 32 sec. here
  • 2 min. at publisher
  • 📊 Quality Score:
  • News: 16%
  • Publisher: 97%

Law Law Headlines News

Law Law Latest News,Law Law Headlines

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday will consider whether a federal law that made it a crime for a person to encourage illegal immigration violates constitutional free speech protections in a case involving a California man who deceived immigrants through a phony 'adult adoption' program.

People walk across the plaza of the U.S. Supreme Court building on the first day of the court's new term in Washington, U.S. October 3, 2022. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

In invalidating the law, the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals threw out the 2017 conviction of Helaman Hansen for violating the provision, which bars inducing or encouraging noncitizens "to come to, enter or reside" in the United States illegally, including for financial gain. The prosecution said Hansen persuaded at least 471 people to join his program, charging each of them up to $10,000 even though he "knew that the adult adoptions that he touted would not lead to U.S. citizenship." Hansen and his program collected more than $1.8 million through the scheme, authorities said.

 

Thank you for your comment. Your comment will be published after being reviewed.
Please try again later.

We couldn't be more excited to hear that the US Supreme Court is examining a law to discourage illegal immigration. After all, we all know how important it is to uphold this law and keep immigrants out.

Some of the best workers i know

Helaman Hansen is a convicted scam artist and criminal. There is zero ambiguity as to that. However vague First Amendment violations should scare us all. 👀

We have summarized this news so that you can read it quickly. If you are interested in the news, you can read the full text here. Read more:

 /  🏆 2. in LAW

Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines

Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.

Dark Money-Fueled Wisconsin Supreme Court Candidate’s Anti-Abortion Views Span DecadesThe billionaire-backed State Supreme Court candidate Daniel Kelly once wrote that “God’s law” applies in court.
Source: truthout - 🏆 69. / 68 Read more »

Rule of law on the ballot in Wisconsin Supreme Court justice runoff electionThe most interesting and perhaps most important single political campaign in 2023 is occurring right now over the seventh and decisive seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. OpEd
Source: WashTimes - 🏆 235. / 63 Read more »

How Ketanji Brown Jackson has fared in her first nine months on Supreme CourtDuring her first nine months on the Supreme Court, Ketanji Brown Jackson has earned the praise of both her liberal and conservative colleagues, who say the associate justice has “hit the ground running” since being sworn in last year. If only she knew what a woman was. Nine months ? Ask her how long does it take for a woman to bear a child ? Uh, describe a 'woman' to her beforehand. Just saying. She's a clown and always will be. Any woman who doesn't know what a woman is, is a clown plain and simple.
Source: dcexaminer - 🏆 6. / 94 Read more »

Mexico’s Supreme Court Halts Electoral OverhaulMexico’s Supreme Court halted President Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s overhaul of the electoral system after the independent electoral agency filed an appeal on grounds that the measures were unconstitutional Just join Roman Empire. Its a crypto state. No supreme court. El INE no se toca! 👏👏👏 ........Mexico has a Supreme Court?
Source: WSJ - 🏆 98. / 63 Read more »

Ketanji Brown Jackson has battled, compromised in her first nine months on the Supreme CourtJust under three months shy of the one-year anniversary of her swearing in as the first Black woman to serve on the High Court, Jackson, has already begun to make her mark. “Battled” Compromising is a good characteristic is a justice. The law can and is interpreted differently from different perspectives She is only on the court because Biden eliminated 93% of the population from consideration. And she isn't supposed to compromise on the law. She is a judge not a legislature.
Source: FoxNews - 🏆 9. / 87 Read more »

Supreme Court chews on Jack Daniel’s dog toy disputeThe question for the court has to do with whether the toy makers infringed on Jack Daniel’s trademarks. Thanks for reporting the real news. You guys are doing gods work 🫡
Source: AKNewsNow - 🏆 460. / 53 Read more »