Abstract
This chapter explores three important themes in constitutional immigration law. First, as creators and executors of U.S. immigration policy, Congress and the President have virtually limitless power over designating who may enter the country, under what terms, and when they must leave. Second, this plenary power over immigration law was created by a complicit U.S. Supreme Court and has never been constitutionally repudiated. The plenary power doctrine thus enjoyed the Court’s imprimatur, guaranteeing considerable political branch latitude even if laws resulted in systemic exclusion based on invidious criteria like race or national origin. Third, notwithstanding this historical deference to the political branches, the Court has provided an occasional yet essential check on legislative and executive overreaching.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
U.S. Constitution, Fourteenth Amendment (“No State shall…deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”).
- 2.
- 3.
Despite the death in early 2016 of Justice Antonin Scalia, the 2016 presidential election should continue this legacy.
- 4.
Pub. L. 96–212.
- 5.
Pub. L. 99–603, 100 Stat. 3445.
- 6.
See Deferred Action for Childhood Removals (DACA) (2012), http://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/consideration-deferred-action-childhood-arrivals-daca and Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) (2014), http://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/ExecutiveActions/EAFlier_DAPA.pdf.
- 7.
For a thoughtful and comprehensive discussion of prosecutorial discretion within immigration law, see Wadhia (2015).
- 8.
U.S. v. Texas, 579 U.S. __ (June 23, 2016) (after Scalia’s death, the 4–4 decision upheld the appeals court that struck down the 2014 executive order).
- 9.
Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803).
- 10.
347 U.S. 483 (1954).
- 11.
130 U.S. 581 (1889).
- 12.
130 U.S. at 606.
- 13.
149 U.S. 698 (1893).
- 14.
345 U.S. 206 (1953).
- 15.
345 U.S. at 214.
- 16.
345 U.S. at 212 (citing Knauff v. Shaughnessy, 338 U.S. 537, 544 [1950]).
- 17.
345 U.S. at 220 (Jackson J., dissenting).
- 18.
556 U.S. 662 (2009).
- 19.
422 U.S. 873 (1975).
- 20.
For a comprehensive study of the Roberts Court’s immigration decisions from 2009 to 2013, see Johnson (2015).
- 21.
Hiroshi Motomura refers to these as phantom constitutional norms. See Motomura (1990), pp. 545–613.
- 22.
559 U.S. 356 (2010).
- 23.
132 S. Ct. 1479 (2012).
- 24.
128 S. Ct. 2307 (2008).
References
Chan, Sucheng, ed. 1991. Entry Denied: Exclusion and the Chinese Community in American, 1882–1943. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Guerin-Gonzales, Camille. 1994. Mexican Workers and the American Dream: Immigration, Repatriation, and California Farm Labor, 1900–1939. New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.
Harwood, Edwin. 1984. “Arrests Without Warrant: The Legal and Organizational Environment of Immigration Law Enforcement,” U.C. Davis Law Review (17): 505.
Hutchinson, Edward P. 1981. Legislative History of American Immigration Policy, 1798–1965. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Johnson, Kevin R. 2015. “Immigration in the Supreme Court, 2009–2013: A New Era of Immigration Law Unexceptionalism”. Oklahoma Law Review 68: 57.
Kanstroom, Daniel. 2000. Deportation Nation: Outsiders in American History. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
López, Ian Haney. 1996. White By Law: The Legal Construction of Race. New York: New York University Press.
Motomura, Hiroshi. 1990. “Immigration Law after a Century of Plenary Power: Phantom Constitutional Norms and Statutory Interpretation,” Yale Law Journal (100): 545.
Neuman, Gerald E. 1996. Strangers to the Constitution: Immigrants, Borders, and Fundamental Law. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Penn State Law, Rights Working Group. 2012, May. The NSEERS Effect: A Decade of Racial Profiling, Fear, and Secrecy, http://pennstatelaw.psu.edu/_file/clinics/NSEERS_report.pdf.
Romero, Victor C. 2009. Everyday Law for Immigrants. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.
Romero, Victor C. 2010. “Interrogating Iqbal: Intent, Inertia and (a Lack of) Imagination,” Penn State Law Review. 114: 1419.
Romero, Victor C. 2014. “The Criminalization of Undocumented Migrants,” in Hidden Lives and Human Rights in the United States: Understanding the Controversies and Tragedies of Undocumented Immigration, volume 2,” ed. Lois Lorentzen, Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.
Wadhia, Shoba Sivaprasad. 2015. Beyond Deportation: The Role of Prosecutorial Discretion in Immigration Cases. New York: New York University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2017 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Romero, V.C. (2017). The Power of Exclusion: Congress, Courts, and the Plenary Power. In: Bender, S., Arrocha, W. (eds) Compassionate Migration and Regional Policy in the Americas. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-55074-3_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-55074-3_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-137-55073-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-55074-3
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)