Explain why there is considered a “blurring” between civil law and criminal law in immigration regulation.
What will be an ideal response?
Perhaps, to make sense of what has become a confusing system with a number of debatable outcomes and consequences, we should not just understand that the criminal law and civil law are different. Rather, we must note that immigration proceedings and determinations are civil in nature due to historical etiology that can explain this development. As it turns out, the basis for these distinctions extend back to the late 1800s, when the Supreme Court held, in Fong Yue Ting v. United States (1893), that deportation was a civil rather than a criminal sanction. In other words, deportation, in and of itself is not punishment, per se, but is instead an administrative proceeding intended to simply return immigrants to their native countries of origin. The reasons for this ruling warrant that some context be given. In theory, these changes and their list of achievements are intended to correct the inherent contradictions and deficiencies that exist within the quagmire of this convoluted mix of civil and criminal law objectives.
You might also like to view...
The expected value of the standard deviation is the mean of the sampling distribution of standard deviations
Indicate whether the statement is true or false.
The ________ has been most active in the western U.S.
Fill in the blank(s) with the appropriate word(s).
When crimes came to be seen as offenses against society, the needs of the ________ were largely forgotten
A) King B) survey C) victim D) state
Which of the following has to do with "abandoned property"?
A. California v. Greenwood B. Donovan v. Dewey C. New York v. Burger D. Florida v. Riley