If found that removal was within proper usage of AEA then they are not given any more due process. This must be decided by the courts quickly.
The definition of who the constitution protects needs another review by the SC. Difficult to reverse decisions but its been done before. Considering the cost and time to give any and every illegal so called due process it should get another look. There is some precedence that burden (cost) on the govt be considered when it comes to this.
The Due Process Rights of Illega...
The Due Process Rights of Illegal Entrants to the United...
This NPC blog video analyzes the due process rights of illegal immigrants. While Presidential tweets have questioned the existence of those rights, the case law is a little more robust in allowing...Due process is determined by the three-part test laid out in Mathews v. Eldridge.[11] Under that case, there must be an opportunity to be heard “at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner,” and a three-part test requires a court to consider:
· the person’s interest that will be affected by the official action;
· the risk of an erroneous deprivation of that interest through established procedures and the gain to decision-making accuracy of additional or substitute procedural safeguards; and
· the government’s interest, including administrative and fiscal costs, in avoiding the burdens of the proposed safeguards.
By
Highmark ·
Pelle15 Newest Member ·