1- Read the outline first
2- Use the book of 'Immigration and Citizenship' process and policy, seventh edition- west law
3- Keep your answers focused
4- Two Questions - 8 pages each, double space
5-Legal memo style
6- Use the famous immigration cases, which appear in the outline and the book in analyzing the questions
7-Simple citation: only Cases name, and the book page number
This material may consist of step-by-step explanations on how to solve a problem or examples of proper writing, including the use of citations, references, bibliographies, and formatting. This material is made available for the sole purpose of studying and learning - misuse is strictly forbidden.In 1988, Santos Hernandez–Carrera, a refugee from Cuba , was convicted of sexual assault and sentenced to six years in prison. He was released from prison in 1993, and, if he had been a United States citizen, he might now be a free man. But because he is not a citizen, he will remain detained indefinitely. He may be an unsympathetic and unlikely person to use as the exemplar for an immigrants’ rights argument, but the very fact that he has offended public sensibilities encourages consideration of the foundation of constitutional protections—whether that foundation is a shared humanity or a particular legal status. Hernandez–Carrera’s conviction required that he be deported once he completed his prison term in 1993, but the United States and Cuba did not have an agreement under which he could be “removed.” The Immigration and Naturalization Service, (“legacy INS”) continued to detain him and over 3,000 other “non-removable” aliens5 until 2001 when the landmark case, Zadvydas v. Davis , held that indefinite detention of lawful permanent residents (“LPRs”) raised serious constitutional questions . After this decision, legacy INS released over one thousand LPRs .While Hernandez–Carrera is not an LPR, the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) should have released him four years later when Clark v. Martinez extended the protection against indefinite detention to inadmissible aliens. Instead, the DHS determined that Hernandez–Carrera was “especially dangerous” and continued to hold him pursuant to a new regulation . When Zadvydas disallowed indefinite detention, legacy INS quickly promulgated 8 C.F.R. § 241.14(f) under which Hernandez–Carrera is presently held. The regulation requires the indefinite detention of any alien if: (1) the alien committed a violent crime, (2) the alien suffers from mental illness, and (3) there is no condition of the alien’s release that can guarantee public safety .The regulation provides some procedural protections, but these protections fall well short of those afforded citizens. A line of Supreme Court decisions from 1972 to 1996 considered the substantive and procedural due process problems inherent in the civil commitment of mentally ill citizens....