The judge that convicted Lopez in south dakota threw the book at him which i thought was very necessary. Once the supreme court got a hold of it the judges have to clairy what aggravated felony is and should state law over rule federal Law. The problem was the definitiion of a aggrevated felony offense. According to the CSA ( Controlles Substance Act) and INA (Immigration and Nationality act), "The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) lists as an "aggravated felony" "illicit trafficking in a controlled substance . . . including a drug trafficking crime (as defined in section 924(c) of title 18)," 8 U. S. C. §1101(a)(43)(B), but does not define "illicit trafficking." Title 18 U. S. C. §924(c)(2) defines "drug trafficking crime" to include "any felony punishable under the Controlled Substances Act" (CSA)."http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/06pdf/05-547.pdf . The juge had deciceded that because the offense had to do with drug possession it would be considered a felony under the state law and be grounds for deportation. Lopez of course fought for an appeal on the grounds that his offense according to the Controlled Substance Act was still only a misdeaminor and is not grounds for deportation since the INA requires the offense to be a Felony. The judge reasoning was the offense was charged as a felony since state laws states any drug possion as a felony. According to the CSA it must be a Illicit Trafficking offense for them to be considerderd a felony. Lopez was not trafficking since the definition of trafficing is, "To pass goods and commodities from one person to another for an equivalent in goods or money; to buy or sell goods; to barter; to trade."http://www.dictionary.net/trafficking. He was only convicted of Aiding and abetting another person's possession of cocaine.