Should a One-Day Jail Sentence Result in a Permanent Ban from the United States? The Question the Court Didn’t Ask, but Should Have in Torres v. LynchHamilton and Griffin on Rights (2015)
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Torres v. Lynch. At issue was whether a state court conviction for attempted arson fell within the Immigration and Nationality Act’s “aggravated felony” provision when the federal statute includes a jurisdictional requirement not in the state statute. Lost in the argument was the very real impact the Court’s decision will have on thousands of children and their families. Should the court decide in favor of the government, noncitizens who committed even relatively minor crimes years ago will continue to be subject to deportation, permanently banished from the United States, and separated from their United States citizen spouses, significant others, and children. As several studies have shown, women and children who depend on their noncitizen spouses, fiancés, or fathers for financial and emotional support will be affected the most.
Publication DateNovember 5, 2015
Citation InformationAngela D. Morrison. "Should a One-Day Jail Sentence Result in a Permanent Ban from the United States? The Question the Court Didn’t Ask, but Should Have in Torres v. Lynch" Hamilton and Griffin on Rights (2015)
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/angela_morrison/49/