Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Institution
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Mandatory Immigration Detention For U.S. Crimes: The Noncitizen Presumption Of Dangerousness, Mark Noferi
Mandatory Immigration Detention For U.S. Crimes: The Noncitizen Presumption Of Dangerousness, Mark Noferi
Mark L Noferi
The Immigration Detention Risk Assessment, Mark Noferi, Robert Koulish
The Immigration Detention Risk Assessment, Mark Noferi, Robert Koulish
Mark L Noferi
In early 2013, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) deployed nationwide a new automated risk assessment tool to help determine whether to detain or release noncitizens pending their deportation proceedings. Adapted from similar evidence-based criminal justice reforms that have reduced pretrial detention, ICE’s initiative now represents the largest pre-hearing risk assessment experiment in U.S. history—potentially impacting over 400,000 individuals per year. However, to date little information has been released regarding the risk assessment algorithm, processes, and outcomes.
This article provides the first comprehensive examination of ICE’s risk assessment initiative, based on public access to ICE methodology and outcomes as a …
Cascading Constitutional Deprivation: The Right To Appointed Counsel For Mandatorily Detained Immigrants Pending Removal Proceedings, Mark Noferi
Mark L Noferi
When a Department of Homeland Security officer mandatorily detains a green card holder without bail pending his removal proceedings, for a minor crime committed perhaps long ago, the immigrant’s life takes a drastic turn. If he contests his case, he likely will remain incarcerated in substandard conditions for months or years, often longer than for his original crime, and be unable to acquire a lawyer, access family whom might assist, or access key evidence or witnesses. In these circumstances, it is all but certain he will lose his deportation case, sometimes wrongfully, and be banished abroad from work, family, and …
Towards Attenuation: A 'New' Due Process Limit On Pinkerton Conspiracy Liability, Mark L. Noferi
Towards Attenuation: A 'New' Due Process Limit On Pinkerton Conspiracy Liability, Mark L. Noferi
Mark L Noferi
Since 1946, Pinkerton v. United States has purportedly settled the rule that a conspirator can be held vicariously liable for the crimes of his co-conspirators. Over the last thirty years, however, courts have begun to articulate and enforce Due Process limits on vicarious conspiracy liability where defendants are "attenuated" from their co-conspirator's crimes. This article represents the first academic examination of constitutional Due Process limits on Pinkerton conspiracy liability, their theoretical underpinnings, and the implications as the federal government pursues terrorism and corporate conspiracy prosecutions.