Personhood Under the Due Process Clause: A Constitutional Analysis of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996
David M. Grable
Abstract
Open-access reader
David M. Grable
Abstract
Open-access reader
able, unappealable determination on an alien's admissibility, 8 the expedited removal procedure potentially violates aliens' due process rights.Furthermore, by attempting to use that unreviewable, unappealable removal order as a basis for a criminal prosecution, 9 and by barring collateral attack of that order in the criminal prosecution, 10 the subsequent prosecution procedure flies in the face of Supreme Court precedent establishing aliens' constitutional rights in criminal prosecutions.This Note tackles these constitutional issues.Part I provides definitions for the alien classifications that are relevanc to the constitutional analysis.Part II sets forth the mechanics of the expedited removal and subsequent prosecution procedures.Part Il traces a century of Supreme Court jurisprudence on aliens' procedural due process rights.In so doing, Part I establishes that the Supreme Court's traditional approach treats some aliens as nonpersons for due process purposes."Part IV uses the traditional approach to examine the constitutionality of the expedited removal procedure.Part IV analyzes the expedited removal procedure as it applies to (1) initially arriving aliens;(2) returning aliens; and (3) aliens present in the United States.The traditional analysis concludes that the expedited removal of initially arriving and returning aliens is clearly constitutional, and that the expedited removal of present aliens is a close constitutional question.In reaching these conclusions, Part IV illustrates that the traditional approach's method of analysis fails to comport with mainstream, contemporary due process doctrine, and leads to troubling constitutional conclusions.Refusing to accept the shortcomings of the traditional approach, Part V argues that the IIRIRA provides the Court with the ideal opportunity to jettison the traditional due process framework in favor of a new and improved approach.This new approach-the "stake theory'-would afford aliens more due process protection, and, more im-8 See infra Part HA 9 See infra Part H.B. 10 See infra Part II.B. 19 See 2
OpenAlex reports 5 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
able, unappealable determination on an alien's admissibility, 8 the expedited removal procedure potentially violates aliens' due process rights.Furthermore, by attempting to use that unreviewable, unappealable removal order as a basis for a criminal prosecution, 9 and by barring collateral attack of that order in the criminal prosecution, 10 the subsequent prosecution procedure flies in the face of Supreme Court precedent establishing aliens' constitutional rights in criminal prosecutions.This Note tackles these constitutional issues.Part I provides definitions for the alien classifications that are relevanc to the constitutional analysis.Part II sets forth the mechanics of the expedited removal and subsequent prosecution procedures.Part Il traces a century of Supreme Court jurisprudence on aliens' procedural due process rights.In so doing, Part I establishes that the Supreme Court's traditional approach treats some aliens as nonpersons for due process purposes."Part IV uses the traditional approach to examine the constitutionality of the expedited removal procedure.Part IV analyzes the expedited removal procedure as it applies to (1) initially arriving aliens;(2) returning aliens; and (3) aliens present in the United States.The traditional analysis concludes that the expedited removal of initially arriving and returning aliens is clearly constitutional, and that the expedited removal of present aliens is a close constitutional question.In reaching these conclusions, Part IV illustrates that the traditional approach's method of analysis fails to comport with mainstream, contemporary due process doctrine, and leads to troubling constitutional conclusions.Refusing to accept the shortcomings of the traditional approach, Part V argues that the IIRIRA provides the Court with the ideal opportunity to jettison the traditional due process framework in favor of a new and improved approach.This new approach-the "stake theory'-would afford aliens more due process protection, and, more im-8 See infra Part HA 9 See infra Part H.B. 10 See infra Part II.B. 19 See 2
Key concepts: Personhood, Immigration, Immigration reform, Due Process Clause, Political science, Illegal immigrants, Law and economics, Law