The fifth amendment
The fifth amendment states that “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” Now in the simplest of terms it means that a grand jury is required when trialing a civilian in the federal court of law for a felony, a person cannot be charged with the exact same crime twice, the government cannot take your property for the use of the public without compensating you nor can the government take your liberty property or life without due process. The fifth amendment is a civil right because it deals with the right of citizens to political and social freedom such due process .
The Supreme Court case to best support the right to due process is Reno V Flores case of 1993. The Supreme Court case gave the United state of America national standards the placement and treatment of minors which back than was known as immigration and naturalisation custody. The agreement settlement concluded and established minimum standards for detention and policy that favoured the release of minors. Alongside the terms of this agreement it also required that if children were to be held in federal custody that they were to be held in the least restrictive environment as possible more so because it would be a traumatic experience for such innocent souls. The settlement calls on Federal authorities to treat “all minors with dignity, respect and special concern for their particular vulnerability as minors.“
Justice Antonin Scalia wrote “it is well established that the Fifth Amendment entitles aliens to due process of law in deportation proceedings.” The Flores v Reno case dates back to the mistreatment of minors which is how the case came about. Now at the heart of the family separation crisis the Flores v Reno case has a 30+ year history. During the 1980s many cases were filed over the mistreatment of unaccompanied minors, Jenny Lisette Flores being a victim of mistreatment at aged 15 having fled from El Salvador. She left her home country fleeing in search of her Aunty who was Living within the USA at the time but she was detained at the border.
Flores and other minors like herself were forced to share bathrooms and sleeping quarters with adult men and women who were unrelated, she was also regularly stripped searched. She was told that she could only be released back to her parents and not to her aunt. The case went through many federal courts before landing a spot in the Supreme Court presence but majority of the time the courts agreed with the government. It was in 1997 that a decree known as the Flores Settlement was able to set the standards for unaccompanied immigrant minors were in the custody of federal authorities. The Flores settlement agree,ent required children to be released to either their parents, another relative, legal guardian or a program willing to uptake the care and responsibility of these unaccompanied immigrant minors.
The cases relevance to due process? Immigrants have the right to due process, the issue is in some cases immigrants are not even given a hearing at all. Under the removal process of illegal immigrants, immigrants who have been in the united states for 2 years or less and/or are apprehended at the border can almost be immediately deported with out having to go the courts with the current exception of asylum seekers who have to be granted a hearing. Those who don’t go through either of these removal processes have the right to due process according to the fifth amendment
The fifth amendment right I’m focusing more on is the right to due process because it is at the heart many immigration cases, immigration being a major issue that is currently going on in the United States after The Trump Administration basically imprisoned immigrant children. The Fifth Amendment states that “no person … shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” The Reno v Flores 1993 Supreme Court case has recently comeback into the spotlight after Donald trump separated all these families. This particular case let to an agreement that required the government to safely return these children back to either their parents, close relatives or a program which is licensed within a 20 day period of time. To my best understanding and in the simplest form of explanation the Trump administration are blaming the Flores agreement for the separation of immigrant minors and want to throw out the settlement agreement that gives illegal aliens the right to due process which meaning if they were to do so successfully not only would minors be deported but alongside their family which has ultimately been the goal of the trump administration, to decrease the number immigrants in the United States. The Trump administrations has seen ending the Flores agreement as a “solution” to the immigration issues surrounding the United States. To them the indefinite detention of asylum seekers and stricter ruling around the Flores agreement is nothing more than a legal loop while that becomes profitable in the long run for the government which is horrifying and sad although some may see it as an opinion it is educated. Consider this, if the government were to keep parents in detention centres indefinitely until their cases are able to be reviewed by a judge than keeping children in HHS care it is much cheaper to do because HHS cost a lot of funding. Also legally the government would be allowed to treat one family as on case than two seperate cases of parent and child, that means less work, less immigrants, more money. Getting rid of the Flores agreement settlement would mean families would be placed in detention centres indefinitely, which would be in the long term very traumatic for families and minors. This would also ultimately get rid of the ruling to release children back to their families within the 20 day stated period.