Deportation, Social Control, and Punishment: Some Thoughts about Why Hard Laws Make Bad Cases.

47 Pages Posted: 2 May 2005  

Daniel Kanstroom

Boston College - Law School

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?

Suggested Citation

Kanstroom, Daniel, Deportation, Social Control, and Punishment: Some Thoughts about Why Hard Laws Make Bad Cases.. Harvard Law Review, Vol. 113, pp. 1890-1935, 2000. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=715208

Daniel Kanstroom (Contact Author)

Boston College - Law School ( email )

885 Centre Street
Newton, MA 02459-1163
United States

Paper statistics

Downloads
278
Rank
90,442
Abstract Views
3,060