Juliet P. Stumpf
Lewis & Clark Law School
Washington and Lee Law Review, Vol. 66, p. 1683, 2009
Lewis & Clark Law School Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2009-9
Proportionality is conspicuously absent from the legal framework for immigration sanctions. Immigration law relies on one sanction - deportation - as the ubiquitous penalty for any immigration violation. Neither the gravity of the violation nor the harm that results bears on whether deportation is the consequence for an immigration violation. Immigration law stands alone in the legal landscape in this respect. Criminal law incorporates proportionality when imposing graduated punishment based on the gravity of the offense; contract and tort law provide for damages that are graduated based on the harm to others or to society.
This Article represents the first and fundamental step in a larger project of articulating a proposed remedial scheme that would align immigration law with the broader landscape of legal sanctions. It traces the history of immigration sanctions, offering a historical perspective on the recent arrival of deportation as the central immigration sanction. The Article takes a fresh approach to remedying violations of immigration law, proposing a system of graduated sanctions that would align immigration remedies with the overarching goals of U.S. immigration law.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 59
Keywords: immigration, proportionality, penology, criminal, deportation, penalty, punishment, sanction, remedy, crimmigrationAccepted Paper Series
Date posted: March 26, 2009 ; Last revised: March 30, 2010
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.469 seconds