Cascading Constitutional Deprivation: The Right to Appointed Counsel for Mandatorily Detained Immigrants Pending Removal Proceedings

Today, an immigrant green card holder mandatorily detained pending his removal proceedings, without bail and without counsel, due to a minor crime committed perhaps long ago, faces a dire fate. If he contests his case, he may remain incarcerated in substandard conditions for months or years. While i...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:  
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Noferi, Mark (Autor)
Tipo de documento: Electrónico Libro
Lenguaje:Inglés
Publicado: 2012
En:Año: 2012
Acceso en línea: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Verificar disponibilidad: HBZ Gateway

MARC

LEADER 00000cam a22000002c 4500
001 1866617621
003 DE-627
005 20250122054910.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 231020s2012 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
035 |a (DE-627)1866617621 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1866617621 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 2,1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Noferi, Mark  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Cascading Constitutional Deprivation: The Right to Appointed Counsel for Mandatorily Detained Immigrants Pending Removal Proceedings 
264 1 |c 2012 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Today, an immigrant green card holder mandatorily detained pending his removal proceedings, without bail and without counsel, due to a minor crime committed perhaps long ago, faces a dire fate. If he contests his case, he may remain incarcerated in substandard conditions for months or years. While incarcerated, he will likely be unable to acquire a lawyer, access family who might assist him, obtain key evidence, or contact witnesses. In these circumstances, he will nearly inevitably lose his deportation case and be banished abroad from work, family, and friends. The immigrant's one chance to escape these cascading events is the off-the-record Joseph hearing challenging detention. If he wins the hearing and is released, he can then secure counsel, and if so, will likely win his case. Yet detained and most likely pro se, he may not even know a Joseph hearing exists, let alone win it, given the complex statutory analysis involved, regarding facts, witnesses, and evidence outside his reach. The immigration detention system today is unique in modern American law, in providing for preventive pretrial detention without counsel pursuant to underlying proceedings without counsel - let alone proceedings so complex that result in a deprivation of liberty as severe as deportation. In this Article, I call this the cascading constitutional deprivation of wrongful detention and deportation. I argue, under modern procedural due process theories, that this cascading constitutional deprivation warrants appointed counsel, notwithstanding traditional plenary power over immigration laws. In a post-Padilla v. Kentucky world where criminal defenders must now advise their clients on the same issues litigated at the Joseph hearing, I argue a right to appointed counsel for mandatorily detained immigrants pending removal proceedings is constitutionally viable and practically feasible 
856 4 0 |u https://core.ac.uk/download/232686194.pdf  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mkri 
951 |a BO 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4394254213 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1866617621 
LOK |0 005 20231020043723 
LOK |0 008 231020||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-2619)CORE69318813 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-2619  |c DE-627  |d DE-2619 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-2619 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a core 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw