Title
Detaining Due Process: The Need for Procedural Reform in 'Joseph' Hearings after Demore v. Kim
Document Type
Working Paper
Publication Date
6-24-2014
SSRN Discipline
Economics Research Network; Legal Scholarship Network; Social Insurance Research Network; Law School Research Papers - Legal Studies; Law & Society eJournals; Law & Society: Public Law eJournals; LSN Subject Matter eJournals; Constitutional Law, Jurisprudence & Legal Philosophy eJournals; Political Science Network
Abstract
In Demore v Kim the US Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of mandatory detention of legal permanent residents who had conceded removability This Article critiques the Courts excessive reliance on the noncitizens concession of removability in justifying mandatory detention and the Courts assumption that the availability of a socalled Joseph hearing at which a noncitizen may contest her inclusion in the mandatory detention statute adequately protects noncitizens from the erroneous deprivation of liberty This Article argues that the procedures in place at the Joseph hearing violate procedural due process under Mathews v Eldridge and explores possible procedural reforms
Recommended Citation
Shalini B. Bhargava Ray,
Detaining Due Process: The Need for Procedural Reform in 'Joseph' Hearings after Demore v. Kim,
(2014).
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.ua.edu/fac_working_papers/351