Government earns legitimacy only to the extent that it prevents the arbitrary deprivation of individual rights. In criminal law, the writ of habeas corpus is a principal vehicle by which federal and state courts provide this protection. The essence of habeas is to ensure a full judicial review of the merits of every constitutional claim raised by a petitioner regarding the legality of her confinement.
This protection is essential in criminal law. Criminal cases are deeply imbued with constitutional implications. Any criminal case in any court implicates the defendant’s rights under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments, and many others raise First, Second, Fourth, and Eighth Amendment concerns as well. The Warren Court decided a host of landmark cases defining national standards on the meaning and application of each of these rights. Many of these landmark cases arose on federal habeas corpus petitions. This era also produced a vitally important opinion about how habeas cases should be decided. Hidden among the Warren Court habeas cases is a brief decision issued in Case v. Nebraska that is remarkable for its clarity, as well as for the joining of forces between Justices Brennan and Clark, who found common ground on a straightforward proposition: the states owe both the people and the federal courts fair procedures by which federal rights may be vindicated in state court. Contained within the decision’s few paragraphs is a blueprint that would guide the development of habeas corpus over the subsequent thirty-five years.
Scholars discuss the most significant immigration-related cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, their ramifications, and what to expect in 2020.
Ever since Boumediene was decided federal judges have not applied the full force of all six of Boumediene’s holdings to immigrant habeas cases, and as a direct result immigration advocates lost their most important cases to date.
Experts discuss legal developments and related ramifications one year after President Trump declared a national emergency at the U.S. Southern Border with Mexico in order to build a wall.
Migrant children fleeing violence in their native countries have experienced severe psychological trauma before and after entering the country when we separated them from their families and placed them in detention facilities, and some families remain separated.