In this case there was only one Justice that did not agree in the final ruling. Justice Thomas felt , "Lopez’s state felony offense qualifies as a “drug trafficking crime” as defined in §924(c)(2). A plain reading of this definition identifies two elements: First, the offense must be a felony; second, the offense must be capable of punishment under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). No one disputes that South Dakota punishes Lopez’s crime as a felony. See S. D. Codified Laws §22–42–5 (1988). Likewise, no one disputes that the offense was capable of punishment under the CSA. See 21 U. S. C. §844(a). Lopez’s possession offense therefore satisfies both elements, and the inquiry should end there" http://www4.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/05-547.ZD.html. Justice Thomas believes that if you are convicted of a misdeamenor in a state and that crime can be classified as a felony according to the INA then it should be grounds for deportation. The problem is the termelogy of the different crimes. Illict trafficking is questionable under the INA. The court decides that only a Federal felonies can be classified as a drug trafficking crime according to thomas. " The Court, however, takes the inquiry further by reasoning that only federal felonies qualify as drug trafficking crimes. According to the Court, the definition of drug trafficking crime contains an implied limitation: “any felony punishable [as a felony] under the” CSA. The text does not support this interpretation. Most obviously, the language “as a felony” appears nowhere in §924(c)(2). Without doubt, Congress could have written the definition with this limitation, but it did not."http://www4.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/05-547.ZD.html. Thomas does make a good point that a felony in plain text is described as a conviction of more then one year in jail. "Thomas relied on the plain meaning of the word felony, which is any crime that is punishable by more than one year in prison.39 Also, Justice Thomas disagreed with the majority's claim that all trafficking offenses must contain a commercial element.40 In fact, by the majority's own admission, some possession crimes fall within the definition of "illicit trafficking."http://www.law.duke.edu/journals/DJCLPP/index.php?action=showitem&id=37. Its hard to disagree with thomas since it seems the decision has changed the law so that a legal alien can commit a drug offense and still given the opportunity to live in the US.