Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Where Do We Go From Padilla V. Kentucky? Thoughts On Implementation And Future Directions, Maureen A. Sweeney Jan 2011

Where Do We Go From Padilla V. Kentucky? Thoughts On Implementation And Future Directions, Maureen A. Sweeney

Faculty Scholarship

On March 31, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court held in the landmark case of Padilla v. Kentucky that the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel in criminal cases includes the right for non-U.S. citizens to be correctly and specifically advised about the likely immigration consequences of a plea agreement. The decision represents an important shift in the way courts have addressed such claims by noncitizen defendants. The Court’s decision recognizes a constitutional requirement that defense counsel provide advice in an area of law in which few defense counsel are knowledgeable, and therefore raises important and difficult questions about …


Penalty And Proportionality In Deportation For Crimes, Maureen A. Sweeney, Hillary Scholten Jan 2011

Penalty And Proportionality In Deportation For Crimes, Maureen A. Sweeney, Hillary Scholten

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


Constitutionalizing Immigration Law On Its Own Path, Anne R. Traum Jan 2011

Constitutionalizing Immigration Law On Its Own Path, Anne R. Traum

Scholarly Works

Courts should insist on heightened procedural protections in immigration adjudication. They should do so under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause rather than by importing Sixth Amendment protections from the criminal context. Traditional judicial oversight and the Due Process Clause provide a better basis than the Sixth Amendment to interpose heightened procedural protections in immigration proceedings, especially those involving removal for a serious criminal conviction. The Supreme Court’s immigration jurisprudence in recent years lends support for this approach. The Court has guarded the availability of judicial review of immigration decisions. It has affirmed that courts are the arbiters of constitutional …