Document: 507 U.S. 292 113 S.Ct. 1439 123 L.Ed.2d 1 Janet RENO, Attorney General, et al., Petitionersv.Jenny Lisette FLORES al. No. 91-905. Argued Oct. 13, 1992. Decided March 23, 1993. Syllabus * Respondents are a class of alien juveniles arrested by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) on suspicion being deportable, then detained pending deportation hearings pursuant to regulation, promulgated in 1988 codified at 8 CFR § 242.24, which provides for release minors only their parents, close relatives, or legal guardians, except unusual compelling circumstances. An immigration judge will review initial deportability custody determinations upon request juvenile. 242.2(d). Pursuant consent decree entered earlier litigation, who not released must be placed juvenile care facilities that meet exceed state licensing requirements provision services dependent children. contend they have right under Constitution laws routinely into other "responsible adults." The District Court invalidated regulatory scheme unspecified due process grounds, ordering adult part[ies]" added list persons whom requiring hearing before an held automatically, whether requests it. Appeals, en banc, affirmed. Held: 1. Because this is facial challenge respondents establish no set circumstances exists regulation would valid. United States v. Salerno, 481 739, 745, 107 2095, 2100, 95 697. Pp. ____. 2. Regulation its face, does violate Due Process Clause. (a) deprive "substantive process." substantive asserted properly described as child has available parent, relative, guardian, government responsible, private custodian rather than government-operated government-selected child-care institution. That novel claim cannot considered " 'so rooted traditions conscience our people ranked fundamental.' supra, 751, 2103. It therefore sufficient rationally connected government's interest preserving promoting welfare juveniles, punitive since it excessive relation valid purpose. Nor each unaccompanied individualized placement his "best interests." Governmental minimum standards, indicates here, but decision those standards policy judgment, constitutional imperative. Any remaining doubts eliminated fact almost all aliens suspected can detained, over Congress granted General broad discretion regarding detention. U.S.C. 1252(a)(1). (b) Existing INS procedures provide with "procedural Respondents' demand merely process" argument recast procedural terms. faulty because do require automatic determinations. In context challenge, providing suffices. been shown too young ignorant exercise right; any waiver revocable; there evidence delay holding when requested. 3. scope General's continue pursues purpose lawful seek, striking balance between INS's concern juveniles' permit just assessment neither expertise nor resources conduct home studies placements. approved custodians reflects traditional view parents relatives competent custodians, otherwise defers States' proficiency field custody. motivated administrative convenience; use presumptions generic rules reasonable; period detention may result limited hearing, concluded reasonable dispatch avoid habeas corpus. 942 F.2d 1352 (CA9 1991), reversed remanded. SCALIA, J., delivered opinion Court, REHNQUIST, C.J., WHITE, O'CONNOR, KENNEDY, SOUTER, THOMAS, JJ., joined. filed concurring opinion, STEVENS, dissenting BLACKMUN, Maureen E. Mahoney, petitioners. Carlos Holguin, respondents. Justice SCALIA Court. Over past decade, increasing numbers accompanied related adults. Respondents, so hearings, them 2 given determine what terms deportable should hearing.1 Board Appeals stated "[a]n generally . required post bond finding he threat national security poor bail risk." Matter Patel, 15 I. & N. Dec. 666 (1976); cf. National Center Immigrants' Rights (NCIR), 502 ----, 112 551, 116 546 (1991) (upholding imposing conditions release). case however, simply send off night recognizance. parties present suit agree assure itself someone resolution proceedings. easily done juvenile's also family together; becomes complicated alone, i.e. adult. This problem serious one, arrests thousands year (more 8,500 1990 alone)—as many 70% unaccompanied. Brief Petitioners 8. Most these boys mid-teens, perhaps 15% girls same percentage 14 years age younger. See id., 9, n. 12; App. Pet. Cert. 177a. 3 For number was apparently dealt regional ad hoc basis, some offices releasing range adults organizations. 1984, responding increased flow California, Western Regional Office adopted limiting 'a parent guardian,' 'unusual extraordinary cases,' could responsible individual agrees well child.' Flores Meese, 934 991, 994 1990) (quoting policy), vacated, 1991) (en banc). 4 July following year, four action Central California behalf class, later certified court, consisting 18 Region "a guardian fails personally appear take them." 29. complaint raised seven claims, first two challenging (on constitutional, statutory, international law grounds), final five 5 partial summary judgment statutory international-law challenges policy, late 1987 settled claims conditions. court turned equal-protection had rational basis treating proceedings differently from exclusion proceedings2 (whom regulations permitted paroled, circumstances, including "friends," see 212.5(a)(2)(ii) (1987)). prompted initiate notice-and-comment rulemaking "to codify single both proceedings." 52 Fed.Reg. 38245 (1987). agreed defer consideration respondents' until promulgated. 6 uniform deportation-exclusion rule finally adopted, published May 17, 1988, Detention Release Juveniles, 53 17449 (codified 242.24 (1992)), expanded possibilities somewhat beyond far commenters suggested. "shall released, order preference, to: (i) parent; (ii) guardian; (iii) relative (brother, sister, aunt, uncle, grandparent) [sic ] presently detention," unless determines "the such secure timely appearance ensure safety others." 242.24(b)(1) (1992). If listed individuals detention, consider simultaneous "on discretionary case-by-case basis." 242.24(b)(2). A outside also, sworn affidavit, designate another person capable willing child, provided "execute[s] agreement presence future 242.24(b)(3). Finally, "unusual [INS] district director chief patrol agent," execute attendance agreement. 242.24(b)(4). 7 foregoing provision, requires designated official, "Juvenile Coordinator," locate "suitable facility occupancy juveniles." 242.24(c). briefly hold minor "INS having separate accommodations juveniles," 242.24(d), resolving conditions-of-detention within 72 hours arrest place meets exceeds established Alien Minors Care Program Community Relations (CRS), Department Justice, 15569 Memorandum Understanding Re Compromise Class Action: Conditions Detention, 85-4544-RJK (Px) (CD Cal., Nov. 30, 1987) (incorporating CRS notice program description), reprinted 148a-205a (hereinafter Juvenile Agreement). Juveniles deemed "because issues payment authorization medical care." Fed.Reg., 17449. "Legal custody" "detention" more accurately describes reality arrangement, correctional institutions "state shelter care, foster group children," Agreement 176a, operated "in open type setting without need measures," 173a. provide, accordance "applicable statutes accepted practices, principles procedures," 157a, extensive services, physical maintenance, counseling, education, recreation leisure-time activities, reunification access religious visitors, assistance, 159a, 178a-185a. 9 Although replaced focus decided maintain litigation new rule. Just week after took effect, brief, unpublished referred "due grounds," three important respects. CV 25, 1988), 146a. First, ordered "any eligible custodian, conservator, party." Ibid. (emphasis added). Second, dispensed regulation's requirement unrelated formally juvenile, §§ 242.24(b)(3) (4) (1992), addition ensuring rewrote determination prima facie examiner, 287.3, alien's request, decreed instead immigration-judge probable cause restrictions "forthwith" arrest, 10 divided panel reversed. 991 1990). Ninth Circuit voted rehear selected eleven-judge banc court. Rule 35-3. vacated affirmed respects." 1352, 1365 (1991). One dissented part, 1372-1377 (opinion Rymer, J.), toto, 1377-1385 Wallace, C.J.). We certiorari. 1261, 117 490 II 11 make principal attacks 242.24. assert "fundamental" "freedom restraint," 16, denial detain them, prove pursuing governmental manner narrowly tailored minimize restraint liberty. Secondly, argue violates process," determine, regard lacks best interests lie adult." even if infringes rights, authority find economic discuss objections order, though we course reach conclude fails.3 12 Before proceeding further, observations. application particular instance; yet applied instance—because existence —when brought (directed 1984 effect issued invalidating us findings fact, indeed record, concerning interpretation history enforcement. statement promulgation. To prevail "must [regulation] valid." 697 true challenges, Schall Martin, 467 253, 268, 18, 104 2403, 2412 81 207 (1984), NCIR, U.S., S.Ct., 555. 13 second point related. spend much time, amici more, condemning held, alleging severe belie Service's reasons retaining custody—leading, presumably, conclusion retention unconstitutional infliction punishment trial. 746-748, 2101-2102; Wong Wing States, 163 228, 237, 16 977, 981, 41 L.Ed. 140 (1896). But whatever might began, now (at least Region, where members held) presumably compliance forth conditions, 5. settlement entitles enforce 148a-149a, acknowledge done, Tr. Oral Arg. 43. disregard effort reopen alleging, purposes says be. III relies line cases interprets Fifth Fourteenth Amendments' guarantee law" include component, forbids infringe certain liberty all, matter provided, infringement serve interest. See, e.g., Collins City Harker Heights, 503 1061, 1068, 261 (1992); 746, 2101; Bowers Hardwick, 478 186, 191, 106 2841, 2844, 92 (1986). "Substantive analysis begin careful description right, "[t]he doctrine judicial self-restraint utmost whenever asked break ground field." Collins, --- 1068; 194-195, 2846. restraint" invoked issue case. Surely sense shackles, chains, barred cells, Agreement. come go will, since, said elsewhere, "juveniles, unlike adults, always form custody," Schall, 265, 2410, fails, (indeed, ) either appoint else so. relatives: challenged sought. Rather, alleged willing-and-able fundamental inaccurately call "non-custodial setting," reason why apply incidentally acquired orphans abandoned children well, giving federal courts major role management orphanages institutions. Cf. Ankenbrandt Richards, 504 2206, 2215, 119 468 unaware, court—aside below—has ever decent humane custodial institution unwilling become child's undertake temporary mere novelty enough doubt sustains it; certainly 2103 Snyder Massachusetts, 291 97, 105, 54 330, 332, 78 674 (1934)). Where intend punish humane, surely Constitution. "preserving child," Santosky Kramer, 455 766, 102 1388, 1401, 71 599 (1982), 269, 2412. categorical discussed above, points right: interests"—followed answer affirmative. seems us, institutional (despite availability custodians) itself, less desirable arrangement child. "The venerable phrase familiar divorce proceedings, proper feasible criterion making accorded traditionally sole criterion—much criterion—for other, channeled judgments involving children, conflict varying degrees others. Even were shown, example, couple desirous adopting welfare, nonetheless removed long adequately. Quilloin Walcott, 434 246, 255, 98 549, 555, 511 (1978). Similarly, child" standard governs parents' guardians' custody: met, subordinated guardians themselves. R.C.N. State, 141 Ga.App. 490, 491, 233 S.E.2d 866, 867 (1977). 17 likewise absolute exclusive responsibilities undertakes, reconciled responsibilities. Thus, parens patriae authority, constitutionally funded level schooling health available; substitute, wherever possible, nonadoptive care. And principle applies, think, responsibility transferring Federal Government's control, nonexistent unavailable. Minimum rights impaired; requirements—to give one additional priority concerns compete public funds attention—is interests" is, essence, narrow tailoring involved. impairment lesser (here, strangers) demands "reasonable fit" protecting custody) means chosen advance leaves ample room agency decide, has, factors lack child-placement favor using another. There short, better, (as readily be, assuming decree) good enough. 19 harbored constitutionality (concededly overwhelming majority involved here) aliens. "For recognized valid, regulating relationship visitors committed political branches Government." Mathews Diaz, 426 67, 81, 96 1883, 1892, 48 (1976). '[O]ver conceivable subject legislative power complete.' Fiallo Bell, 430 787, 792, 97 1473, 1478, 50 (1977) Oceanic Steam Navigation Co. Stranahan, 214 320, 339, 29 671, 676, 1013 (1909)). naturalization, 'Congress regularly makes unacceptable citizens.' 1478 79-80, 1891). dispute entering country illegally Carlson Landon, 342 524, 538, 525, 533, 547 (1952); 235, 980. enacting precursor 1252(a), presumption deportation, committing General. 538-540, 533-534. Of course, still (unexacting) advancing legitimate purpose—which does, shall connection challenge. 20 argue, footnote, "equal protection guarantee" Amendment disparate treatment evident (1) detaining without, (2) delinquency 5034, tradition reposing support former distinction; difference citizens adequate latter. IV 21 turn provides. Japanese Immigrant Case, 189 86, 100-101, 23 611, 614, 47 721 (1903). received detail employed. 22 Though procedure obtaining warrants named available, 1252(a)(1); 242.2(c)(1) ordinarily begins warrantless officer believe arrestee "is violation [immigration] likely escape warrant obtained," 1357(a)(2). Arrested offered choice departing voluntarily, 1252(b) (1988 ed., Supp. III); 242.5 98% course. Lopez-Mendoza, 1032, 1044, 3479, 3486, 82 778 (1984). seeks execution voluntary departure communicate friend, organization found free list." 242.24(g) (1992).4 seek departure, examining 24 arrest. 287.3; member enforcement staff, arresting (unless qualified examiner available). 287.3 "there establishing laws," ibid., formal initiated through issuance show cause, 242.1, made him, 287.3. notifies commencement serving him Form I-221S (reprinted 7a-8a) which, Act 1990, 1252b(a)(3)(A) III), English Spanish. front allegations against date hearing. back contains section entitled "NOTICE OF CUSTODY DETERMINATION," checks box indicating Service, recognizance, bond. Beneath boxes, states: "You Judge redetermine decision." 242.2(c)(2) (The quasi-judicial Executive Review, division separated staff. 3.10.) check stating "I do" "[I] redetermination decision," sign form. dissatisfied outcome, obtain further 242.2(d); 3.1(b)(7), courts, see, 529, 531, 528, 529. system better terms, reject reasons. 25 F.2d, 1364. disagree. At insofar concerned, satisfied judge. asking waive presented. old telephone contact sometimes attorney. waiver, moreover, revocable: time process. 242.2(d) Uluocha, __ (Interim 3124, BIA 1989). "knowingly intelligently" waiving self-incrimination criminal cases. Fare Michael C., 442 707, 724-727, 99 2560, 2571-2573, 61 197 (1979); Saucedo-Velasquez, 843 832, 835 (CA5 1988) (applying juvenile). prehearing status significant. 26 out requested, held. assume, invariably ensue—particularly delay, isolated instances. Chirinos, 276 (BIA 1977). V 27 goes contention rejected 'reasonable foundation,' 541, 534, seek. 558-559. think does. 28 accompanying promulgation 242.42, addressing question "as whose released," began dual propositions "concern adult" released." 17449, (1988). "strik[e] balance" defining presumptively appropriate while maintaining local directors circumstances." society Court's jurisprudence presumed preferred primary Parham J.R., 584, 602-603, 2493, 2504, 101 (1979). extends blood protective respected. Moore East Cleveland, 431 494, 1932, 531 (1977); compare Village Belle Terre Boras, 416 1, 94 1536, 39 797 (1974). finally, includes guardianship possess "special proficiency" domestic relations, 2215. When state-appointed immediately available,5 normally keep government-supervised state-licensed shelter-care facility, searching although others possible cases.6 object purely "administrative convenience," charge echoed dissent, post, grasp distinction convenience (or, speak pejoratively, efficiency) policy—for considering late-filed objections—and efficiency selecting achieving Only latter here. requisite declares protect juvenile," calling false. (Respondents' real save money imputes mendacity irrationality, expensive release.) involves deprivation compelled ignore costs difficulty alternative declared goal. Compare Stanley Illinois, 405 645, 656-657, 1208, 1215, 31 551 (1972). impossible contradict "expertise," "qualified," studies, here impose essentially law-enforcement obligation expend developing qualification.7 reordering priorities say, inclination shrink task. 1154(c) (requiring applicants "sham" marriages). hold, dissent contends, "minimizing costs" justification ____; justified strangers entails expenditure commit.8 30 statute "blanket" unsuitability guardians. that, contexts, 1252(a)(1) "some determination." 558-559; 533. NCIR demonstrates, mean forswear rules. 11, 559 11; Heckler Campbell, 461 458, 467, 103 1952, 1957, 76 66 (1983). specific necessary accurate regulation: Is deportable? age? Does guardian? exceptional else? particularization individuation this.9 abuse permits INS, once determined indefinitely. inherently dispatch" 747, 2101, (1987) (noting limits pretrial Speedy Trial Act). expected remain average days. 178a. undue periods corpus insufficient remedy abuses.10 reasonableness negative putative fail seem, anything, increase by. 32 response difficult problems presented juveniles. policies "we [not] legislature charged formulating policy." 281, 2419. On accords relevant statute. 33 reversed, remanded consistent opinion. 34 ordered. 35 SOUTER joins, concurring. 36 I join write separately clarify my protected freedom confinement. lies core Clause, today otherwise. reverse complies 37 "Freedom bodily Clause arbitrary action." Foucha Louisiana, 1780, 1785, 118 437 handcuffs, straitjackets, cells. person's implicated she confined prison, mental hospital, institution, confinement liberal. clear cavil, concerned. "In analysis, State's affirmative act restraining individual's own behalf—through incarceration, institutionalization, similar personal liberty—which 'deprivation liberty' triggering protections ." DeShaney Winnebago County Social Services Dept., 489 189, 200, 109 998, 1006, 249 (1989). institutionalization triggers heightened, scrutiny. "sufficiently compelling" justify action, usually imprisoning convicted forestalling danger community. 748, 2102, (1987); Foucha, ---- - 1785-1786. 38 Children, too, respect, narrower adult's. Beginning re Gault, 387 87 1428, 527 (1967), consistently assertion adult, 'not custody.' Id., 1438. Gault various (notice charges, counsel, confrontation cross-examination, privilege self-incrimination), As explained, "Ultimately, confront boy misconduct. restrained years. consequence—and practical meaning called Industrial School. however euphemistic title, 'receiving home' 'industrial school' incarcerated greater time. His world building whitewashed walls, regimented routine hours. Instead mother father sisters brothers friends classmates, peopled guards, [and] employees. 27, 1443 (footnote internal quotation marks omitted). 40 Winship, 397 358, 90 368 (1970) (proof-beyond-reasonable-doubt applies proceedings); Breed Jones, 421 519, 1779, 44 346 (1975) (double jeopardy (1979) (proceedings commit hospital satisfy process). Our restraints," absent stigma labeled "delinquent," Breed, "mentally ill," Parham, 600-601, 2503. upheld New York authorizing dangerous analyzing length complied "are assumed control parental falters, State play part patriae. 2410. seen plausible implicating interest, limitation protection. ibid. Significantly, case, York's "open facilit[ies] community locks, bars, officers receives counseling recreational facilities." 271, 2413. kind hardly handcuffing her, confining her cell, heightened 42 seem odd such, choices setting, implicates answer, this. Institutionalization decisive event. consequences erroneous commitment tragic [C]hildhood particularly vulnerable life erroneously institutionalized during formative bear scars rest lives." 627-628, 2517 (footnotes omitted) Brennan, J.). "[i]n [for adults] norm, prior trial carefully exception," 755, 2105, society, grow up families, sure, failure unable harm. scrutiny prevent placing necessary. ensures acts sensitive area 43 sum, deciding concept "liberty" hitherto unprotected aspect well-being, H. Gerald D., 491 110, 2333, 105 91 (1989); (1986), squarely comports ante, ____ (substantive scrutiny); (procedural scrutiny). Specifically, absence vitiate combined Agreement, normal forms faltered explains facially survives "Where 'preserving child,' 766 [102 599] purpose." Ante, rightly focuses presume longer 'most disturbing,' 1358 banc) 1014 (Fletcher, dissenting)), troublesome ones Register, (1988), plainly associated minors. With place, compatible [legitimate] purposes," 2412, finds conforms understanding, BLACKMUN dissenting. 45 devotes considerable attention debunking notion "absolute exclusive" undertakes. "good enough," ____, perfectly declining 46 explain, disagree proposition, view, agency's minimizing patently inadequate harmless enough."1 What most curious about vigorously denies desire burden "other Reply 4. way attack judging precisely invokes refusal adults:" "[T]he articulated furthers "[Respondents] argu[e] INS' furthering 'blanket' factual showing welfare. argument, represents nothing disagreement, criticizes failing pursue namely respondent: cared suitable, government-monitored juvenile-care facilities, knowledge seeking unfit. reflecting polity reliable inappropriate juveniles—whose troubled background familiarity culture, particularized needs commonly shared juveniles—to guardians." 4-6 (internal citations, emphasis, 49 Possibly implausibility government-controlled government-sponsored "better" "appropriate" independent reaches argued, expressly disavowed tug attention," share colleagues' eagerness aggressive tack substantial Instead, asks begin, despite able assume contrary belied experience citizen whatsoever led Agency's regulation. explain ill-conceived ill-considered authorized 242(a) Nationality notions law. outset, emphasize critical points. pose risk flight, harm themselves They third receive them; many, most, never deported.2 little custody, vastly different person—whether cousin,3 godparent, friend charitable organization—willing detained.4 ways comparable 51 imprisonment probation parole. Both "legal dimensions identify great divide separates two. Morrissey Brewer, 408 471, 482, 2593, 2600, 484 allegedly improved confinement—a incidentally, disputed several curiae.5 offenders detract slightest basic proposition wholesale indefinite, occasion, approached year.6 governing proposed contracts (though legal) minors, duration anticipated approximately thirty (30) days; variables uncertainties inherent [r]ecipients design programs combination short term imposes limit writ "conclusive showing" processing "with warranted facts examples protracted common, potential lengthy present. "invariably ensue," small comfort typical detainee. glosses speaks mountains bona fides demonstrates complete support, experience, parties" somehow protects change INS. Prior change, conformed practice followed country, magistrates throughout administration Delinquency Prevention 1974. Consistently consensus expressed recommended juveniles,7 authorizes offense party (including, to, promise bring requested magistrate determines, represented insure 5034 added).8 record magistrate, party," resulted nationwide discloses demonstrated policy. 55 Nevertheless, 'in cases, Director Chief Patrol Agent.' Messe, 1355 1991). Commissioner explained "necessary minor's [sic] maintained liability." 1990), noted, "did cite instances befallen did reference suits arising improper releases." 1355.9 56 questioning Commissioner's explanation equally significant admittedly "deplorable."10 How administrator possibly commingling opposite sex11 centers barbed-wire fences,12 recreation, visitation,13 subjecting strip searches,14 comprehend. 57 relating increases motive Region. indication persisted. Moreover, undocumented came instituted them. 1023 dissenting). played original decisional process, possibility add trying legitimacy. 58 After commenced, enjoined injunction promulgate issue.15 offer caused imposed burdens agency. 59 relied assertions. "provides thus outstanding injunction. "witnessed dramatic encounters," "not relative." mention, actual approximate encountered, smaller elect departure.16 Third, Agency added).17 obvious "just spectrum extended members, godparents, friends, Fourth, Again, elaborate "home study" evaluate qualifications conducted past. strange irony suddenly releases preceded study," scarcity "resources" spending perform newly discovered study obligation.18 60 failed say. comment body professional that. recognizes harmful juveniles.19 completion places specified person.20 understand purportedly say not, put end litigation. again enforcement, deprived respondent Amendment. subsequent entry injunction, continued performing causing confirming supposed developed recent years, petitioners attention, hesitate off-the-record material point. supra. 62 appears adverse ruling, product deliberation precede undeniably impact liberty, suppose, concluding invalid.21 shed light legitimately exercised question, address issue. alternative, indeterminate unconstitutional. 63 Section "alien taken may, [a] deportability, (A) custody; (B) containing prescribe; (C) conditional parole." Despite exceedingly language 242(a), "once tyranny literalness rejected, considerations content words operative." Witkovich, 353 194, 199, 77 779, 782, 765 (1957). Rights, Inc., (NCIR). 64 interpreting suggest "considerations" paramount: indications congressional restrictive broader generate doubts." 782. (1952), Communist party, relying heavily enacted legislation, Internal Security 1950, based subversion threatened Nation. Communists "wholly Congress' intent," 558 (summarizing ). last Term, faced acted bonds contain condition forbidding unauthorized employment deportability. NCIR. Relying "often recognized" restricting preserve jobs American workers," id. 8, 558, omitted), authority." construed willfully 'information nationality, habits, associations, information deem fit proper.' 195, 780. Noting "issues touching liberties safeguards, 'person,' fairly [broad] statute," inquiries calculated overdue. 201-202, 783. 65 holds "presumptively custodians" indefinitely "approved" custodians.22 guiding Carlson, Witkovich compel conclusion. spoken quite clearly plight 1974 preference release, opposed S.Rep. 93-1011, p. (1974) U.S.Code Cong. Admin.News 5283 ("[Section 504] establishes juvenile").23 And, significantly very case; child.24 retort directed citizens, whereas aliens, 8; 5, justifies dismiss force source reduced absurdity contending treat illegal citizens. relies. 67 deeper grants deportation. "purpose injure [the States] imputed 1950 bail. rely substitute discretion. 68 clear. predicate presumptio[n]," ante Communism posed "clear States," membership Party deportation.25 Yet, affirming Communists, note grounded "evidence plus activity supporting extending Party's philosophy violence," 535 noted "[t]here denied bail," allowed large cases." 541-542, 535. 69 By reasoning, authorized, suitability determining detained. aliens," lengthen subjected. facing diverse, precious, base crucial "appropriate custodians," intended authorize policy.26 70 me exceeded INS-preferred 'When validity drawn raised, cardinal ascertain construction avoided.' 783 Crowell Benson, 285 22, 62, 285, 296, 598 (1932)). general bears restraint. raises Witkovich. Legislative harsh contemplated Congress. Unlike colleagues, actions 242(a). O'CONNOR "have [that] Clause." (concurring opinion). Indeed, Term. (1992) ("Freedom action"). ("We 'minimize importance nature' liberty") 750, 2103, am convinced she, otherwise." institutions, curtailed, defines "alleged institution." Finding claimed "nove[l]," "fundamental," concludes "right" adults" trumped and, significantly, avoiding inconvenience expense custodians. 73 "novelty" analysis. stake another, place. exception." 2105 necessary, justified. explains, scrutinized serves "legitimate interests, 749, addition, implemented "carefully limited" "narrowly focused." 1786.27 74 withstand scrutiny.28 266, However, blanket presumes focused Categorical distinctions cousins uncles, godparents persons, blunt instruments deprivations more.29 going demonstrate, command 1786 (finding grounds "dangerousness" adversary "which convincing demonstrably community"); 742, 2098 follows flight community); 263, 2409 (same; "serious risk" crime); Gerstein Pugh, 420 103, 126, 854, 869, (holding Fourth prerequisite detention); Greenwood 350 366, 367, 410, 411, 100 412 (1956) crimes incompetency); 534 (approving party); Ludecke Watkins, 335 160, 163, 1429, 1430, 1881 (1948) Enemy Act; adduced hearings). 657-658, 1215-1216, (1972) (State unwed fathers; fitness); Carrington Rash, 380 89, 95-96, 85 775, 779-780, 675 (1965) (striking down depriving servicemen stationed vote franchise fide residents achieved assessing serviceman's residency basis).30 75 If, powerful unnecessary official evaluation justification, refused determinations? emphasized utterly lacking expert Presumably improbability upholding really actually words, cages gilded, employ all. linchpin reading characterizing insubstantial nonfundamental convenience" thoroughly rights. (citing, comparison, (1972)). adult; essence defeated resources. then, Illinois look derive controlling Stanley, flatly premise underlying today. entertained death mother, wards father's fitness statute, conserving refusing children: "Procedure cheaper easier determination. when, forecloses determinative competence explicitly disdains realities deference formalities, needlessly risks running roughshod stand. 79 "Bell Burson, 402 [91 1586, 90] (1971), purporting concerned fault suspending driver's license, license assess fault. Absent fault, attenuated excuse considered. drivers accidents, statistical matter, wholly partially foreclose proof licenses suspended. 80 "We mandates caring Stanley's de minimis father. insists presuming proving unfitness solely convenient prove. Under advantage dismemberment family." 656-658, 1215-1216. derived denying fathers doing commands: determining, child.31 Ultimately, wrong asserts assumption used conform facilities. have. about. continues litigate. These want enough" incarceration delinquents. guarantees similarly situated read precedents, omission indefinite innocent 83 respectfully dissent. syllabus constitutes prepared Reporter Decisions reader. Detroit Lumber Co., 200 321, 337, 282, 287, 499. Title 1252(a)(1), Stat. 208, amended, provides: "[A]ny parole revoked aggravated felonies narrower. 1252(a)(2) III). Exclusion involve apprehended "entering" laws. Leng Ma Barber, 357 185, 187, 1072, 1073, 1246 (1958). judges claim, 995, 997-1002 1991); 1015 dissenting); (curiously) cross-petition certiorari issue, defend below. Washington Confederated Bands Tribes Yakima Indian Nation, 439 463, 476, 20, 740, 749 740 questions unnecessarily. Jean Nelson, 472 846, 2992, 2997, 86 664 (1985). Canada Mexico opportunity so, treaty obligations notify diplomatic consular countries nationals 242.2(g). "capable well-being." "[To] ensur[e] receiving wishes guardian," 17450 designation affidavit executed officer. maintains decisions, "[c]ategorical persons," "[d]ue more." Post, Acceptance revolutionize nonrelatives, degree affinity, predominant innumerable aspects relations. asserts, prohibit "prefer[ring] [by detention] release," accuses "mischaracteriz[ing] issue" suggesting mischaracterizes uses nonrelatives deny safeguard state-decreed guardianship. referring procedures, drawing already objection puzzling, (dissent) (collecting statutes). wonders organizations allege eager accept rush appointed (temporary permanent, both), becoming difficult, identify—delays processing, existing infringed, "bureaucratic gauntlet"—would duplicate procedures. "indications policy," pertinent indication, believes, acting, appropriate, correct unassailable abuse." 540, (1952). assuredly universally capabilities track applicable field. 557, reliance accord contexts. 1154(d) (INS approve petition orphan home-study favorably residence, study"); 1522(d)(2)(B)(ii) (for refugee "attempt arrange States"); 400.113 (providing payments 1522 and/or law"). mandate fully reads "mere presumptions" exercising dissenters view. 558-559, 563-564, 568, 543, 546, 548 (Frankfurter, believes 1252(a) interpreted 'constitutional doubts.' (1957)); "constitutional doubts" refuge interpretive lost cause. Statutes doubts, 202, 783, eliminate contentions entertain provides, supplement text 1252(a). dissent's citation deposition 1986, 6, "excessive delay" "typical" mid-1988. Justices (statement counsel petitioners). assumes allows "close relative," incorrect reasons: character affinity; 504, 1938, (1977), excludes cousins. apparent face benign (Juvenile Agreement), sustain measures,' 173a) added), suggests designed leave. reinforced next sentence Agreement: "However, strategies discourage runaways definition word Bar Association's Standards "decent humane," ____: every house interim period. Whether gives worst sort jail, comfortable pleasant home, classified 'detention' usual abode." Institute Judicial Administration, Association, Standards: Relating Interim Status (1980) (citing Wald, "Pretrial Juveniles," Pursuing Child 119, 120 (Rosenheim ed. 1976)). overemphasized. formalism else's obscure "[i]nstitutionalization," event." Southwest Refugee Project Amici Curiae 20-33. Deposition Kim Carter Hedrick, Director-Manager (June CD Cal.), 68. Dept. Health, Education, Welfare, Model Acts Family Courts State-Local Children's Programs ("[W]ith speed" "parents, suitable supervision care"); Advisory Committee Prevention, Administration 299 (a jurisdiction "should Commission Criminal Goals, Corrections 267 (1973) ("Detention Noncriminal Misbehavior 41, (1982) ("If consents," soon practicable"). across disposition standards. Ala.Code 12-15-62 (1986) (allowing deems proper"); Conn.Gen.Stat. 46b-133 "parent agency"); D.C.Code Ann. 16-2310 (1989) "parent, him"); Idaho Code 16-1811.1(c) (Supp.1992) adult"); Iowa 232.19(2) (release court"); Ky.Rev.Stat.Ann. 610.200 (Michie "relative, person"); Me.Rev.Stat.Ann., Tit. 15, 3203-A Md.Cts. Jud.Proc.Code 3-814(b)(1) Mass.Gen.Laws 119:67 (1969) reputable Miss.Code 43-21-301(4) Minn.Stat. 260.171 Neb.Rev.Stat. 43-253 (1988) Nev.Rev.Stat. 62.170 N.H.Rev.Stat.Ann. 169-B:14 (1990) crisis facility); S.D. Codified Laws 26-7A-89 court); S.C.Code 20-7-600 agent court-approved program"); Tex.Fam.Code 52.02 (Supp.1993) Utah 78-3a-29(3)(a) adult"). "upon recognizance person. Such jail marshal 765. person" since. added: "It remained undisputed hearings." 1355. liability genuine, occurred Services, (1989), observing "governmental agencies exposure special constraints custody." F.2d., 1363. true, selfish manifestly prudently avoided genesis brief opposition unsatisfactory "these deplorable addressed remedied prevailed benevolent 13. Declaration Paul DeMuro, Consultant, (Apr. 1987, 7. inspecting Mr. DeMuro declared: "[I]t approaches locked, secure, facility. Inglewood concentric perimeter fences enter. El Centro converted migrant farm workers' barracks secured barbed wire. San Diego jail-like. fences, wire, observation areas, etc. entire residential complex high fence (16-18'), supervised uniformed guards." Defendants' Response Requests Admissions (Nov. 1985, pp. 3-4. differs respects: Region; proceedings; (3) brothers, sisters, aunts, grandparents petitioners' attempt describe magnitude record—an sample Texas 1989, 12, assertions 1990. Since figures relate obviou sly tell "dramatic increase" mentioned cited Government encounters events, hoc, nonrecord exposition supposedly highlights casual deliberative speculate recognizance." irresponsible practice, future. cost amount $100 per day Robert J. Schmidt, (July 31, 1986), 76. adoption newborn baby few days officer, doubtful denied. argued duty Consistent Association agencies, 7, Justice's especially he/she corresponding quickly necessary." 304. Rymer pointed Appeals: "Unlike 253 [104 207] [United v.] [481 (1987),] survived reasoned non-relative neutral prompt 242.24(b)(4) release. No required. Nothing detainee help, anyone else. appointing comes forward. analogue report, cursory. While argues investigation independent, albeit informal adult's impractical financially administratively infeasible. entirely resides, government. way, how structure steps plate so." 1374-1375 part) capricious Administrative Procedure (APA), 706. Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Assn. Inc. Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. 463 29, 43, 2856, 2867, 443 (1983) ("[A]n consider, problem, runs counter agency, implausible ascribed expertise"). renew event, managed stay bounds APA, disturbing parallel ready justifications discrimination probably accidental byproduct thinking about" disfavored class. Califano Goldfarb, 223, 1021, 1035, 270 (STEVENS, judgment). circumstances," event emergency. Responses Plaintiffs' Second Set Interrogatories (Jan. 11-12. oral suggested "extraordinary circumstances" situation god lived navigating bureaucracy 54. Regardless precise contours exception sweeping ban discretion, fair meant extremely narrow. "puzzling," would-be Formal regardless permanent unnecessarily prolong puzzling acknowledges, ignores 1938 person," retained 1948 Act, 858, amended Senate Report bill "also amends virtually unchanged thirty-five model acts, codes decisions." 5283, 5284. are, category "juveniles jurisdiction." intent unexceptional human service resettlement 1522(d)(2)(B), abroad 1154(d)). establishment Furthermore, asserting "universally presumptio[n] relatives," flaw prefers presumption—that adults—that explicit nature worldwide conspiracy. found, 'is numbering adherents, rigidly ruthlessly disciplined [a]waiting moment foreign engagements, industrial financial straits, overthrow violence achievement. .' 535, 21, 2(15) 1950). Neither (1991), (1983), "generic rules," contrary. "presumption" footnote 559, noting issue—a employment—seemed work. facto vast authorization, rebutted. 11. extent bearing presumptions, rebuttable identifying regulations—in Once identified, decisions freedom. silent; engaging 554. presents closer analog logic, differences renders woefully precedent Heckler, pre-established medical-vocational guidelines disability benefits, stating: enabling consideration. continually relitigate efficiently rulemaking." 1957 (citations Suffice injured worker, inquiry consideration, rulemaking. More importantly, godparent cousin, benefit. Campbell cuts moorings. rulemaking, cousins, parties. comparison regimes Salerno struck illustrative. provisions Bail Reform allow demonstrate 'reasonably community.' 741, 2098. Foucha: sought ., acute overwhelming. demonstrating required, full-blown convince decisionmaker reasonably strictly limited. maximum stringent limitations Act." contrast, anything Louisiana law, defendants acquitted insanity automatically psychiatric insane, dangerous. 1781. component Amendment: sharply permissible duration. Here, [Foucha] indefinitely." 1787. text, falls side Salerno/Foucha divide. "no 1446. pronouncement. Would detained? saying beneficial some? Whatever rhetoric signify, me, safeguards objecting statement, 24, do, prefer "revolutionize[s]" notable cases: Korematsu 323 214, 193, 89 194 (1944), "military areas" ancestry sabotage espionage. 215-216, 193-194. obviously supports majority's security. reluctance Korematsu. exigencies war thought pay reparations Japanese-Americans period, Restitution World War Internment Americans Aleuts, 903, proceed extreme caution inquire whether, prote cting inability unpersuasive. kinds perverse studies" noncitizens

Category: 1