A Meditation on Moncrieffe: On Marijuana, Misdemeanants, and Migration

14 Pages Posted: 18 Jan 2014 Last revised: 6 Jun 2014

See all articles by Victor C. Romero

Victor C. Romero

The Pennsylvania State University (University Park) – Penn State Law

Date Written: January 16, 2014

Abstract

This essay is a brief meditation on the immigration schizophrenia in our law and legal culture through the lens of the Supreme Court’s latest statement on immigration and crime, Moncrieffe v. Holder. While hailed as a “common sense” decision, Moncrieffe is a rather narrow ruling that does little to change the law regarding aggravated felonies or the ways in which class and citizenship play into the enforcement of minor drug crimes and their deportation consequences. Despite broad agreement on the Court, the Moncrieffe opinion still leaves the discretion to deport minor state drug offenders in the hands of the federal immigration bureaucracy. However, if the current debate among the states regarding the legitimate uses of marijuana helps lead immigration authorities to refocus their efforts on deporting serious criminals only, then immigrant advocates may come to view Moncrieffe in a much more favorable light.

Keywords: immigration, crime, crimmigration, Moncrieffe, deportation, aggravated felony, removal

Suggested Citation

Romero, Victor C., A Meditation on Moncrieffe: On Marijuana, Misdemeanants, and Migration (January 16, 2014). Gonzaga Law Review, Vol. 49, No. 1, 2013/14, pages 23-35; Penn State Law Research Paper No. 18-2014. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2380166

Victor C. Romero (Contact Author)

The Pennsylvania State University (University Park) – Penn State Law ( email )

Lewis Katz Building
University Park, PA 16802
United States

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
46
Abstract Views
503
PlumX Metrics