WASHINGTON – A deeply divided Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that the family of a Mexican teen shot and killed by a U.S. Border Patrol agent cannot seek damages because of the border that was between them.
The justices ruled 5-4 that 15-year-old Sergio Adrian Hernández Guereca lacked constitutional protection against the use of excessive force because he was in Mexico. Had he been in Texas with Border Patrol agent Jesus Mesa, his family would have had a claim.
Associate Justice Samuel Alito wrote the opinion and was joined by the court's four other conservatives. The four liberal justices dissented.
"A cross-border shooting claim has foreign relations and national security implications," Alito said. "In addition, Congress has been notably hesitant to create claims based on allegedly tortious conduct abroad."
Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote the dissent for her liberal colleagues. She said the shooting occurred on the U.S. side of the border, so the majority's concern about applying the law abroad should not apply.
"Neither U. S. foreign policy nor national security is in fact endangered by the litigation," Ginsburg said. "Moreover, concerns attending the application of our law to conduct occurring abroad are not involved, for plaintiffs seek the application of U. S. law to conduct occurring inside our borders."
The case had been watched closely because of President Donald Trump's efforts to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border and to reduce both legal and illegal immigration. Hundreds of incidents involving deadly force occur along the border every year.
Border Patrol agents in New Mexico trained recently to respond to hostile crowds throwing rocks at a border fence on the U.S.-Mexico border.
The Supreme Court in 1971 gave private citizens an implied right to sue federal officials for civil rights violations, even though Congress had passed no such law. But Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch, wrote Tuesday that the precedent should be overruled.
Many who used to visit here regularly also would visit Kat's forum. Now she has opted to say goodbye. Why? Disqus isn't what it used to be, and traffic has crawled to almost a stop. https://countrykatnc.blogspot.com/2026/05/its-finally-friday-and-final-thread.html I have been taking the last couple of months to contemplate what I want to do with this forum. I think it's time for me to step away as well. Reasons are multiple. Mainly the loss of old friends, Susan and milo but others as well that, when I check their profiles, have been inactive for months, some for a year or two. Never heard why. Just stopped coming here or anywhere on Disqus. Lack of enthusiasm and participation has been evident as well. That includes my lack of enthusiasm. I am NOT blaming anyone. I can't advertise this forum so newbies are rare. Regulars have either gone away or drop in and leave a comment or two - often, it seems, out of habit. Back n forth conversations don't happen much any mor...
Maybe the wise and sagacious people on this forum might be able to speculate on the answer. If a vampire bites a zombie, does the zombie become a vampire or the vampire become a zombie? Then we have one of them time paradox questions: If you take an object back in time and leave it there, where did it originally come from? AND one more just for the fun of it.......... If we’re all unique, doesn’t that make being unique not unique?
Comments
Post a Comment