Boston College Law School Faculty Papers
Title
Deportation, Social Control, and Punishment: Some Thoughts about Why Hard Laws Make Bad Cases
Document Type
Article
Comments
Harvard Law Review 113 (2000): 1890-1935.
Abstract
From the Author’s Introduction: We live in a time of unusual vigor, efficiency, and strictness in the deportation of long-term permanent resident aliens convicted of crimes. This situation is the result of some fifteen years of relatively sustained attention to this issue, which culminated in two exceptionally harsh laws: the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA). In many cases, these laws have brought about a rather complete convergence between the criminal justice and deportation systems. Deportation is now often a virtually automatic consequence of criminal conviction. This convergence, and the harshness of these laws – their retroactivity, their use of mandatory detention, the automatic and often disproportionate nature of the deportation sanction, and the lack of statues of limitation – raise two related questions: First, why are we doing this? Second, what could be the consequences of this approach for the constitutional legitimacy of deportation proceedings?
Date of Authorship for this Version
June 2000
Recommended Citation
Kanstroom, Daniel, "Deportation, Social Control, and Punishment: Some Thoughts about Why Hard Laws Make Bad Cases" (2000). Boston College Law School Faculty Papers. Paper 48.
http://lsr.nellco.org/bc_lsfp/48