Immigration detention is a highly charged issue that is front and center on many people’s minds. Some think of it as necessary for their vision of the United States. Others despair over the crushing toll that it takes on detainees, their families and communities across the country. Although public opinion about immigration detention is divided, the due process requirements of our Constitution are clear: immigration detention is lawful only if implemented through fair procedures and done for a legitimate purpose, namely, preventing danger to the community or preventing flight from immigration enforcement.

‘Jennings v. Rodriguez’

Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court weighed in about prolonged immigration detention in Jennings v. Rodriguez, 138 S. Ct. 830 (2018). In Jennings, noncitizens confined pursuant to various federal statutes governing pre-removal immigration detention argued that those laws require automatic hearings to determine the necessity of ongoing detention once detention becomes prolonged. The Supreme Court rejected those statutory arguments but remanded the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to determine whether constitutional due process requires such hearings.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]