Paper Sample on Immigration to the U.S.: Detention and Discrimination of Foreigners

Introduction

For a long time, the U.S. remains a potential target for immigrants across the world. In 2013, more than 40 million immigrants lived in the United States (Moore, 2009). Nevertheless, detention has emerged to be implemented as an enforcement tool to prevent unlawful immigration. Foreign countries are exposed to discriminating questioning, registration, detention, and expatriation due to their country of birth. Many immigrants enter the U.S. for economic opportunities, education purposes, and escaping dangerous gangs or political prosecutions. The Immigration and National Act provides immigration officers the power of detaining illegal immigrants during the removal processes. However, nations are obliged to protect the detainees’ rights. Although detention takes around thirty days, it can prolong to years for some people. America’s non-citizens are treated differently from the Americans in various ways including the violation of international human rights. The United States Constitution includes words like "We the People" indicated the start of new nationhood laying the foundation of exclusion non-American citizens. The paper will describe the intricacies of human rights for the non-citizens of America that are embedded in the U.S. Constitution, U.S. Immigration law, U.S. Immigration, and Customs Enforcement policies and reforms, and international treaties. Also, the paper will prove the existence of the rights and how they are being violated without any effort to address the concern.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

The U.S. Constitutional Protections

The constitutional protections are the basic protection assured by the constitution of the United States. The constitutional protections of the United States directs that regardless of the national identity, all individual should be equally protected, even illegal immigrants. Americans can exercise First Amendment rights and freely share their views on public platforms. Contrarily, the human rights of the immigrants are violated by denying the immigrants their basic rights (Mendoza, 2015). The non-citizens do not have a significant connection to the United States; therefore, cannot practice citizenship rights like the First Amendment. The rights of Americans are vulnerable to severe threats if the state denies fundamental rights to certain groups. The primary protections of people in the United States come from the first ten amendments referred to as the Bill of Rights. Most sections of the constitution use the word “person” or “people” instead of “citizen.” This means that the laws protect everyone within the United States. Therefore, fundamental rights like freedom of speech and protection equality apply to both citizens and non-citizen. Nevertheless, the way the constitutional rights are executed is complex.

Amendments

The First Amendment

The First Amendment to the United States’ Constitution offers protection of freedom of press, religion, and speech. Violation of the first amendment means that the unregistered immigrants lack the freedom of speech or the right to protest in the detention centers. Though the First Amendment protects both citizens and non-citizens, the Supreme Court interprets the amendment differently to various kinds of groups. The Supreme Court insists that immigrants have fewer protections from the First Amendment because a foreign person is not allowed to enter the U.S. as indicated in the rel. Knauff v. Shaughnessy (1950) (Mendoza, 2015). Pineda Cruz v. Thompson acknowledged that migrants cannot use the citizenship rights because of the legal status, though the first amendment rights apply to everyone in the United States (Mendoza, 2015). The unlawful immigrants at detention facilities must be protected and allowed to freely express their issues. The right of speech enables the government to prevent abuse of power, promote reforms’ enforcement, and avoid mistreatment of detained immigrants.

The Fifth Amendment

The Fifth Amendment protects every individual in the United States from deprivation of freedom without due law procedure. It is among the crucial rights for immigrants in detention, which guarantees them the legal counsel required to develop a case and create their credibility to remain in the U.S. The legal system must not allow the government to deprive an individual’s rights for a certain period without providing a judge to decide if incarceration is required. The detained individuals depend on the basic rights because most of them migrate to the U.S. due to violence in their home country, hence are entitled to legal processes for the establishment of their genuine fears as asylums. The decision made by the Supreme Court on Zadvydas v. Davis indicated that every immigrant, irrespective of legal status, should receive due process clause protection of the 5th and 14th Amendments (Mendoza, 2015). Generally, compulsory detainment denies the detainees the chances of their appropriateness for release as only the people apprehended within the United States are allowed to review through an immigration judge. Other court systems have discovered that a policy of compulsory detention without flight risk evidence is not constitutional.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is authorized by the Immigration and Nationality Act to detain the non-Americans illegally in the United States. The DHS used the detention period to assess if an immigrant ought to be removed or has a legitimate reason to stay. Mostly, the DHS retains the discretion to release immigrants from detention. However, the detention period can be prolonged if an individual has committed an identified criminal activity. Mandatory detention policy leads to arbitrary detention due to a lack of personalized review of an immigrant's specific situations. A significant number of people put in compulsory detention are usually found suitable for relief from deportation. Mandatory detention has significant impacts like giving up the quest for protection; thereby, returning to the danger and separation of families because parents are separated from their children at the border, and detained separately. Although separation of families does not directly violate the Fifth Amendment protections, the act exhibits how important it is for the detained immigrants to reunite with their families. For instance, in the case of Lynch v. Cannatella in 2010, the court regarded the civil rights claims of 16 individuals from Jamaica who were discovered entering the U.S. illegally (Rosenbaum, 2018). The Jamaicans were forcefully taken at gunpoint into a detention facility in New Orleans that had no enough toilet facilities, heaters, beds, pillows, and mattresses. Additionally, they were abused, threatened, beaten, and forced to work in conditions of losing their daily meals if they failed to follow instructions. Some became sick due to bathing with cold water in severely cold environments. Afterward, they were released because the court indicated that they did not enter the country for immigration reasons.

Fourteenth Amendment

Moore, (2009) states that immigrants in detention receive different treatment based on whether they are deportable or inadmissible. This is a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment because the amendment states that, "all the individuals in the United States either born or naturalized there and depending on the jurisdiction, are citizens of the U.S. another clause of the Fourteenth Amendment states that, "no State will deny an individual the right of life, property, or liberty, with no due process of law. Also, the Fourteenth Amendment has another clause referred to as the equal protection law, which states that "no one within the United States should be deprived of the equal protection of the laws. The equal protection of the law was aimed at stopping the discrimination of black Americans by the state governments. Non-citizens in the detention facilities are vulnerable to various types of discrimination based on sex, religion, and race, which is not justifiable in the constitutional right of equal protection under the 14th Amendment (Moore, 2009). The Fourteenth Amendment clearly states that equal protection is within the jurisdiction of the United States, hence non-citizens are also included.

US Immigration Law and Universal Jurisdiction

Universal jurisdiction enables countries to accuse a person irrespective of the country of residence or their nationality. The main challenge of universal jurisdiction is based on the conflict between the specificity of political interests and the universality of the jurisdiction's mission in the supreme country that offers the statutory framework for doctrine’s application (Rosenbaum, 2018). The principle of universal jurisdiction inhibits an individual convicted in an international crime to apply for refugee status or request political asylum. Also, the principle of protection ought to ensure that vital interests of a nation or the citizens are protected from criminal activities from foreign countries. Recently, a significant number of people detained for illegal immigration lack criminal records and have less probability of being deterred by prison threats.

Conclusion

The Courts in the United States treat immigration laws differently. The systems are biased and mistreat people due to their national identity. Lack of recognizing complete constitutional protections, especially in liberty rights is still a constant point of systematic inequality (Peri, 2012). The principles of the rule of law can learn from the impact caused by racism in immigration law and solve detention cases differently through equity and morality. Additionally, the United States can repair the ruined immigration detention system by minimizing the number of detainees, releasing others on bond, frequent visits to the detention centers, and frequently reporting requirements.

References

Mendoza, M. (2015). A System in Need of Repair: The Inhumane Treatment of Detainees in the US Immigration Detention System. NCJ Int'l L., 41, 405. file:///C:/Users/User/AppData/Local/Temp/6-Mendoza.pdf

Moore, C. M. (2009). The Immigration Oversight and Fairness Act: Ending the Violation and Abuse of Immigrant Health.

J. Contemp. Health L. & Pol'y, 26, 148. https://scholarship.law.edu/jchlp/vol26/iss1/8

Peri, G. (2012). Rationalizing US immigration policy: reforms for simplicity, fairness, and economic growth. Brookings Report. http://www.hamiltonproject.org/assets/legacy/files/downloads_and_links/05_peri_discussion.pdf

Rosenbaum, C. (2018). Immigration Law's Due Process Deficit and the Persistence of Plenary Power. Berkeley La Raza LJ, 28, 118. http://dx.doi.org/https:/doi.org/10.15779/Z38HQ3RZ6W