Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Trust In Immigration Enforcement: State Noncooperation And Sanctuary Cities After Secure Communities, Ming H. Chen
Trust In Immigration Enforcement: State Noncooperation And Sanctuary Cities After Secure Communities, Ming H. Chen
Publications
The conventional wisdom, backed by legitimacy research, is that most people obey most of the laws, most of the time. This turns out to not be the case in a study of state-local participation in immigration law enforcement. Two enforcement programs involving the use of immigration detainers, a vehicle by which the federal government (through ICE) requests that local law enforcement agencies (LEAs) detain immigrants beyond their scheduled release upon suspicion that they are removable, demonstrate the breakdown of conventional wisdom. In the five years following initiation of the Secure Communities program, a significant and growing number of states and …
Immigration Law’S Looming Fourth Amendment Problem, Michael Kagan
Immigration Law’S Looming Fourth Amendment Problem, Michael Kagan
Scholarly Works
In 2014, a wave of federal court decisions found that local police violate the Fourth Amendment when they rely on requests from the Department of Homeland Security to detain people suspected of being deportable immigrants. The problem with these requests, known as “detainers,” was that they were not based on any neutral finding of probable cause. But this infirmity is not unique to DHS requests to local police. It is characteristic of the normal means by which Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrests people and detains them at the outset of deportation proceedings. These decisions thus signal a glaring constitutional …
The Interstate Agreement On Detainers: Defining The Federal Role, Janet R. Necessary
The Interstate Agreement On Detainers: Defining The Federal Role, Janet R. Necessary
Vanderbilt Law Review
In 1970, Congress enacted into law the Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act, making the United States and the District of Columbia parties to the interstate compact already adopted by 37 states.' The purpose of the Agreement is to "encourage the expeditious and orderly disposition" of charges underlying detainers by providing procedures by which prisoners may request disposition of such charges and prosecuting jurisdictions may obtain the presence of prisoners for trial. Recently problems of interpretation have surfaced as the federal courts have endeavored to define the role of the United States under the Agreement. The courts of appeals presently disagree …
Unconstitutional Uncertainty: A Study Of The Use Of Detainers, Donald E. Shelton
Unconstitutional Uncertainty: A Study Of The Use Of Detainers, Donald E. Shelton
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
The question is why a prosecutor would go through the motions of asking a warden to notify him of the availability of a prisoner that he never intends to take into custody. The first answer is that it is common practice for many prosecutors to automatically file a detainer upon learning that an accused is imprisoned elsewhere. This decision is made without any regard to their eventual decision to prosecute. But the more basic answer, and the reason why this practice of automatic filing of detainers has developed, lies in the effects a detainer has upon the prisoner.