Decoupling 'Terrorist' from 'Immigrant': An Enhanced Role for the Federal Courts Post 9/11

摘要: Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Attorney General John Ashcroft has utilized broad immigration power ceded to him by Congress ferret out terrorists among noncitizens detained for minor violations. Such a strategy provides government two options: deport those who are not terrorists, and then prosecute others are. While certainly efficient, using courts their less formal due process protections afforded should trigger greater oversight vigilance federal at least four reasons: First, while legitimate goal law enforcement is deportation, Ashcroft's true objective in targeting criminal prosecution terrorism subversion. Second, we can well expect that will dispatch agents might be tempted, margin, play fast loose with suspects' civil liberties, as evidenced FBI's deceptive practices over 75 post-9/11 cases. Third, history replete examples zealotry, would do bow majority sentiment especially when racial, ethnic, religious, gender, age stereotypes reinforced expense egalitarian ideal. The legacy Brown v. Board Education Supreme Court never reaffirm Korematsu's principles. And fourth, controlling political overreaching enhances our standing abroad.