The Slatest

Trump’s First Supreme Court Case Could Have Major Implications on His Travel Ban

The U.S.-Mexican border fence at Playas de Tijuana on Jan. 27 in Tijuana, Mexico.

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in Hernández v. Mesa, a case with particular salience given that the Trump administration appears ready to release plans for the enforcement of the president’s executive orders clamping down on undocumented immigrants. The case concerns the 2010 shooting of unarmed Mexican teenager Sergio Hernandez just south of the U.S.-Mexico border by a border patrol agent named Jesus Mesa Jr. The case was a holdover from the Obama era, but it will be the first one argued at the high court by the Trump administration. From the Los Angeles Times:

The killing of the teenager, who was unarmed and posed no apparent threat to the officer, provoked anger on the Mexican side of the border, but U.S. officials refused to extradite Mesa to face charges in Mexico. They also decided against prosecuting him under U.S. law.

Sergio’s parents then sued Mesa, alleging the shooting was an unjustified violation of the Constitution. They cited the 4th Amendment’s ban on unreasonable seizures and the use of excessive force as well as the 5th Amendment, which says no person shall “be deprived of life or liberty … without due process of law.”

The case was initially thrown out by a federal judge on the grounds that the Constitution could not be enforced south of the border. A court of appeals later ruled that the United States could be considered in control of the area around the border, but that existing law was too unclear to merit punishment for Mesa. The case is also thought to hold relevance to the Trump administration’s efforts to ban Muslims from selected countries from entering the United States, which hinge in part on the extent to which they violate the constitutional rights of noncitizens within American jurisdiction. From the Times:

As usual, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy appears to hold the key vote. In the past, he has said the reach of the Constitution should turn on practical concerns, including whether U.S. officials are in control. If so, he could join with the court’s liberals to say the Constitution constrains U.S. agents operating on a border, thereby clearing the family’s lawsuit to proceed. Such a decision would surely be cited by lawyers and judges in the litigation over the travel ban.