Supreme Court sides with immigrant in case challenging sex laws

[DonViejo]

Source: The Hill



BY LYDIA WHEELER - 05/30/17 11:30 AM EDT

The Supreme Court unanimously sided with a Mexican immigrant Tuesday who was going to be deported under immigration laws for having consensual sex with his 16-year-old girlfriend when he was 20 years old.

The justices said in the context of statutory rape offenses that criminalize sexual intercourse based solely on the ages of the participants, the generic federal definition of “sexual abuse of a minor” requires the age of the victim to be less than 16.

The case centered on Juan Esquivel-Quintana, a Mexican citizen who was admitted to the U.S. as a permanent resident in 2000. In 2009, he pleaded no contest in the Superior Court of California to a statutory rape offense — “unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is more than three years younger than the perpetrator,” according to court documents. California considers anyone under the age of 18 to be a minor under the law. But in delivering the opinion of the court, Justice Clarence Thomas said when Congress added sexual abuse of a minor to the Immigration and Nationality Act in 1996 “reliable dictionaries provide evidence that the generic age” then and now “is 16.”

“Absent some special relationship of trust, consensual sexual conduct involving a younger partner who is at least 16 years of age does not qualify as sexual abuse of a minor under the INA, regardless of the age differential between the two participants,” Thomas wrote.

Read more: http://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/335613-supreme-court-sides-with-immigrant-in-case-challenging-sex-laws

[iluvtennis]

1. This was was a legal permanent resident...how canthis country lawfully try to deport him...

...this is outrageous.

[Doreen]

2. Well, that has been going on since the monment trump took office and not

just for people of color so it does not surprise me at all.

[IronLionZion]

3. They're claiming it's an "aggravated felony" in California

when it's not even a crime in many other states. That designation has the power to remove legal immigrants like this guy who has a green card.

http://www.scotusblog.com/2017/02/argument-preview-removal-immigrant-sexual-abuse-minor/

[Princess Turandot]

4. This case was about the application of an INA rule, not about 'challenging sex laws'...

although a sex crime, statutory rape, was involved. In fact, the opinion notes that the court is not ruling on what the age should be to cause an act to be considered a sex crime against a minor. The ruling is on the application of a federal statute in this case.

The plaintiff pleaded 'no contest' for having sex with his girlfriend in California, when he was 20 and she was 16: under California law, the legal age of consent is 18.

The plaintiff was a 'green card' holder aka a permanent resident alien. The INA deemed his crime to be an "aggravated felony" which usually requires mandatory removal of an immigrant from the US. The Immigration and Nationality Act defines an "aggravated felony" to include the "sexual abuse of a minor."

However, under *federal law* for this purpose, a minor is considered to be someone 15 or younger. Because that was not the case here, the court ruled that the mandatory removal statute did not apply:

"Held: In the context of statutory rape offenses that criminalize sexual intercourse based solely on the ages of the participants, the generic federal definition of “sexual abuse of a minor” requires the age of the victim to be less than 16."

BTW, this case began in 2009: it is not the result of Trump's immigration policy.