Podcasts about sergio adrian hernandez guereca

After two criminal trials against Lonnie Swartz wrapped up in Tucson, Jose Antonio's family turned to their civil lawsuit against the agent.  Swartz's attorneys argued that the agent had qualified immunity from prosecution in the case because he was carrying out work for the federal government. They also argued the teen's family had no standing to sue because Jose Antonio did not have strong ties to the U.S. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco allowed the family's lawsuit to move forward. But another case from a Mexican family in Ciudad Juarez who was in a similar circumstance stopped any momentum.  In June 2010, Border Patrol Agent Jesus Mesa Jr shot and killed 15-year-old Sergio Adrian Hernandez Guereca along the El Paso and Ciudad Juarez border. The Guereca family also filed a civil lawsuit against Mesa, but the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals' decision clashed with judges in San Francisco.  Because of the opposing decisions, the Supreme Court of the United States decided to review the case out of El Paso. This would settle the question about what happens when a U.S. Border Patrol agent shoots and kills someone across the border in Mexico.

The Democratic White House hopefuls locked horns in the latest of the party's 10th presidential debate, with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) coming under a fierce volley of attacks ahead of Saturday's primary in South Carolina.What are the takeaways from last night's scrum? This is still a crowded field and will Super Tuesday cull the herd?There are two conflicting portraits of Julian Assange that are being presented at his extradition hearing. The US who want to try Assange on espionage charges, say that he's an "ordinary" criminal whose publication of hundreds of thousands of secret military documents a decade ago put many people at risk of torture and death. Assange's lawyer countered that the WikiLeaks publisher was being victimized by a "lawless" US government that wanted to make an example of him.Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court barred a lawsuit against a Border Patrol agent Jesus Mesa, for fatally shooting a 15-year-old Mexican boy, Sergio Adrian Hernandez Guereca in the face in 2010. Guereca was on Mexican soil from across the border in Texas, refusing to open the door for foreign nationals to pursue civil rights cases in American courts in such incidents. The court ruled 5-4 to uphold a lower court's dismissal of the lawsuit against the agentWhat does this mean for immigrants going forward?GUESTS:Dr. Jack Rasmus — Professor of economics at Saint Mary's College of California and author of "Central Bankers at the End of Their Ropes: Monetary Policy and the Coming Depression." He also writes at jackrasmus.com.Richard Lachmann — American sociologist, specialist in comparative historical sociology and professor at the State University of New York at Albany. Lachmann is best known as the author of the book "Capitalists in Spite of Themselves," which has been awarded several prizes, including the American Sociological Association Distinguished Scholarly Book Award. Walter Smolarek — Producer for Loud & Clear on Sputnik News Radio.Maru Mora-Villalpando — Nationally known immigrant rights activist, co-founder of the Latinx organization Mijente and community organizer with Northwest Detention Center Resistance.Carlos Casteneda — Attorney with The Law Offices of Perez & Malik, who specialize in immigration law.

On June 26, 2017, the Supreme Court decided Hernandez v. Mesa. In 2010, Sergio Adrian Hernandez Guereca, a fifteen-year-old Mexican national, died after being shot near the border between El Paso, Texas and Juarez, Mexico by Jesus Mesa, Jr., a U.S. Border Patrol Agent. Hernandez’s parents, who contend that their son was on Mexican soil at the time of the shooting, sued Mesa in federal district court in Texas, alleging violations of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. After hearing the case en banc, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ultimately ruled in favor of Mesa, concluding that Hernandez could not assert a Fourth Amendment claim and that Mesa was entitled to qualified immunity on the parents’ Fifth Amendment claim. -- In granting certiorari, the U.S. Supreme Court directed the parties to address whether Hernandez’s parents could even raise their claims under Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents, which, sovereign immunity notwithstanding, recognized an implied right of action for damages against federal officers alleged to have violated a citizen’s constitutional rights. Ultimately, the Court vacated the judgment of the Fifth Circuit and remanded the case. -- In a per curiam opinion, the Court underscored that a Bivens remedy is not available when "special factors counsel[] hesitation in the absence of affirmative action by Congress," and noted that the Court had recently clarified in Ziglar v. Abbasi “what constitutes a special factor counselling hesitation.” The Fifth Circuit, the Court directed, should on remand resolve in the first instance the extent to which Abbasi may bear on this case. The Court acknowledged that the Fifth Circuit did not address the Bivens issue because that court had concluded that Hernandez lacked any Fourth Amendment rights to assert--but the Supreme Court considered it imprudent to resolve such a consequential question without a resolution of the Bivens issue first. Finally, the Court indicated that the Fifth Circuit had erred in finding qualified immunity for Mesa regardless of any Fifth Amendment violation because the Fifth Circuit had relied on facts about Hernandez’s nationality and ties to the United States that were unknown to Mesa at the time of the shooting. -- Justice Thomas filed a dissenting opinion. Justice Breyer filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Ginsburg joined. Justice Gorsuch took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. -- To discuss the case, we have Steven Giaier, who is Senior Counsel, House Committee on Homeland Security.

On Monday, the Supreme Court vacated and remanded Hernandez v. Mesa to the Fifth Circuit. The case involved a cross-border shooting and a Bivens claim. -- In July of 2010, a 15-year-old adolescent named Sergio Adrian Hernandez Guereca and his friends were playing along a concrete structure on the border of the U.S. and Mexico. When Jesus Mesa, Jr., a U.S. Border Patrol Agent arrived, he detained one of the youths on the border, and shot and killed Hernandez, who was hiding behind a pillar of the Paso Del Norte Bridge on the Mexican side of the border. Hernandez’s parents sued Agent Mesa under the Fourth and Fifth Amendment for the use of unlawful and disproportionate force. Agent Mesa argued that the Fourth and Fifth Amendments did not apply because Hernandez was not a U.S. citizen. -- The District Court found for Agent Mesa, while the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that the Fifth Amendment protections against deadly force applied but the Fourth Amendment did not, and that Agent Mesa should not receive qualified immunity. -- Steve Giaier of the House Committee on Homeland Security joined us to discuss the Court’s decision to vacate and remand and what it means for the case going forward. -- Featuring: Steven Giaier, Senior Counsel, House Committee on Homeland Security.

On February 21, 2017, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Hernandez v. Mesa. In 2010, Sergio Adrian Hernandez Guereca, a fifteen-year-old Mexican national, died after being shot near the border between El Paso, Texas and Juarez, Mexico by Jesus Mesa, Jr., a U.S. Border Patrol Agent. Hernandez’s parents, who contend that their son was on Mexican soil at the time of the shooting, sued Mesa in federal district court in Texas, alleging violations of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. After hearing the case en banc, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ultimately ruled in favor of Mesa, concluding that Hernandez could not assert a Fourth Amendment claim and that Mesa was entitled to qualified immunity on the parents’ Fifth Amendment claim. -- There are three questions now before the Supreme Court: (1) whether a formalist or functionalist analysis governs the extraterritorial application of the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition on unjustified deadly force, as applied to a cross-border shooting of an unarmed Mexican citizen in an enclosed area controlled by the United States; (2) whether qualified immunity may be granted or denied based on facts – such as the victim’s legal status – unknown to the officer at the time of the incident; and (3) whether the claim in this case may be asserted under Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents. -- To discuss the case, we have Steven Giaier, who is Senior Counsel for the House Committee on Homeland Security.

On February 21, the Supreme Court heard argument in Hernandez v. Mesa. In July of 2010, a 15-year-old adolescent named Sergio Adrian Hernandez Guereca and his friends were playing along a concrete structure on the border of the U.S. and Mexico. When Jesus Mesa, Jr., a U.S. Border Patrol Agent arrived, he detained one of the youths on the border, and shot and killed Hernandez, who was hiding behind a pillar of the Paso Del Norte Bridge on the Mexican side of the border. Hernandez’s parents sued Agent Mesa under the Fourth and Fifth Amendment for the use of unlawful and disproportionate force. Agent Mesa argued that the Fourth and Fifth Amendments did not apply because Hernandez was not a U.S. citizen. -- The District Court found for Agent Mesa, while the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that the Fifth Amendment protections against deadly force applied but the Fourth Amendment did not, and that Agent Mesa should not receive qualified immunity. The main questions for the Supreme Court to answer are: Does the Fourth Amendment apply? Should qualified immunity apply to the border patrol agent? And can Agent Mesa make a Bivens claim? -- Steve Giaier of the House Committee on Homeland Security attended oral argument and shared his perceptions. -- Featuring: Steven Giaier, Senior Counsel, House Committee on Homeland Security

On February 21, the Supreme Court will hear argument in Hernandez v. Mesa. In July of 2010, a 15-year-old adolescent named Sergio Adrian Hernandez Guereca and his friends were playing along a concrete structure on the border of the U.S. and Mexico. When Jesus Mesa, Jr., a U.S. Border Patrol Agent arrived, he detained one of the youths on the border, and shot and killed Hernandez, who was hiding behind a pillar of the Paso Del Norte Bridge on the Mexican side of the border. Hernandez’s parents sued Agent Mesa under the Fourth and Fifth Amendment for the use of unlawful and disproportionate force. Agent Mesa argued that the Fourth and Fifth Amendments did not apply because Hernandez was not a U.S. citizen. The District Court found for Agent Mesa, while the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that the Fifth Amendment Protections against deadly force applied but the Fourth Amendment did not, and that Agent Mesa should not receive qualified immunity. -- Professor Andrew Kent of Fordham University School of Law and Professor Stephen I. Vladeck of UT Austin Law School joined us to examine the case and its implications for extraterritorial application of the Bill of Rights and for qualified immunity. -- Featuring: Prof. Andrew Kent, Professor of Law, Fordham University School of Law and Prof. Stephen I. Vladeck, Professor of Law, The University of Texas at Austin School of Law.