discussion replies reply to classmate post. 150 words each. 2
Immigration is in the news every day. State and local law enforcement’s role in the enforcement of federal immigration laws has reach a level where states and municipalities have passed laws prohibiting local law enforcement officers from assisting ICE. Select any criminal justice immigration related issue/story in the news this week. What, if any, public policy implications are associated with this story? Offer additional thoughts and opinions or related course material/references to support your assessment. Identify the source of the story and post a summary of the story.
24-year old Yery Noel Medina Ulloa is an illegal immigrant from Honduras who is being charged with second-degree murder in the State of Florida (Morphet, Brown, & Fitz-Gibbon, 2021). Ulloh entered the U.S. illegally and then claimed to be a minor under a false name. It is believed that he was sent to Florida by charter flight after being processed by ICE in October of 2021, to stay with a sponsor who he subsequently murders in cold blood several weeks later. This incident is riddled with political implications as the Governor of Florida is holding the Biden Administration responsible for the murder. It is believed that the Biden Administration is taking illegal immigrants from the border and shipping them all around America without the consent, or knowledge of State Governments. Furthermore, it is well within reason to believe that the Biden Administration is relocating illegal immigrants to certain areas for a specific reason.
This case is another example of the failed policies the Biden Administration is trying to implement against acting Federal laws on immigration. In this circumstance, a person has lost their life because the Executive Branch violated Federal Law, and failed to properly process an illegal immigrant who was actually an adult and not a child. States and local municipalities that have no role in the Federal Government’s illegal activities and cannot be held to blame, or held in accessory to any criminal actions of these illegal immigrants. There are sanctuary-cites in the U.S. that accept illegal immigrants and refuse cooperation with ICE agents. These cities are solely run by democrats with left-wing ideologies. The majority of the sanctuary- cities are in the Northwest, California, and Northeast coastal areas. Primary areas for democrat policy making.
This article is in reference to the Presidents build back better plan, which was approved by the House of Representatives last week. The bill still needs to pass the senate, which may happen by the end of the year. The bill has nearly two trillion dollars worth of infrastructure and other updates for our nation over the next decade, but there are also some immigration changes in the bill. The bill has seen many revisions to get to this point. The current version allows for immigrants who have been in the country since before 2011 to stay on a 10 year work permit, however advocates originally wanted a better path to citizenship than just this (Beitsch & Bernal, 2021). This bill would bring an option for immigrants called, “parole” where they can stay in the country up to five years with an option to stay an additional five (Beitsch & Bernal, 2021). Millions would benefit from the bill and be on a better path towards citizenship.
After reading the article it seems some in the Democratic Party are divided on this bill because they feel it does not do enough to promote citizenship for immigrants, although some say it is a step in the right direction. I feel as though providing immigrants a path to work here with a path to citizenship is a good thing. I also feel as though there needs to be balance and we should not allow unmonitored access to our country because we simply do not have the networks built up to support our own citizens (look at the homeless explosion all over) let alone a major amount of new immigrants. With that being said immigrants are good for our country and are a big part of our workforce. At a local law enforcement level in CA we are not allowed to provide immigration information to federal authorities, unless a serious felony is committed. I worked with a couple of homeland security investigators when I was a Detective, and they were quite helpful working with us, and they really only cared about major felons who were under investigation. Public policy implications of this bill are that there will be a lot more immigrants who are here to work legally (many of them are already here illegally but are providing to the workforce). I foresee ICE agents shifting their resources to deporting more serious criminals and such.
An important goal of sentencing guidelines was to eliminate unwarranted disparity in sentencing. What will be the impact of the Supreme Court’s decision for making the federal sentencing guidelines voluntary and advisory rather than mandatory? Will these decisions lead to less uniformity and more disparity in sentencing, or will they enable judges to individualize justice in more appropriate ways? What if any policy implications are associated with this change?
I believe it created a positive and negative impact because it restored discretion for the judges. This gives them the opportunity to evaluate each case Infront of them instead of treating them like similar cases. When judges are considering sentences, they will consider all the circumstances that surround the accused criminal offense. The negative could be if they make them voluntary judges could possibly abuse their discretion. If used correctly we could see possibly mass incarceration rates drop. With judges having voluntary or advisory rather than mandatory it could help ensure our justice system gives reasonable sentencings. Sentencings in some situations either seem to be too harsh or too lenient for example people who commit the smallest drug crime or theft crimes aren’t receiving maximum sentencings for petty crimes. I definitely can see this as a benefit like I mentioned above but yet a negative if this new system is abused. According to this article I found they mentioned “Granted, a more rigorous standard of review than “reasonableness” previously applied. And now, under the reasonableness standard, judges will be able to reach their own sentencing judgments with somewhat less accountability. But judges have gotten used to and conditioned by Guidelines sentencing; they know Congress is watching. And, accordingly, I expect that they will wield their new, additional discretion quite responsibly. In short, the Court’s internal tug-of-war may not have produced a tidy opinion, but it may well have reached a reasonable result (FindLaw, n.d.).” Sentencing guides being voluntary would-be judges making decisions based on their own understanding. Meaning each judge will decide different things on similar cases which would create less uniformity and more disparity in sentencing. I would say policy implications are fairness, consistency, proportionality, and opportunity.
Since the US v Booker and US v Fanfan decisions in 2005, Federal judges now do not have to strictly abide by sentencing guidelines, they are more advisory (Mays & Ruddell, 2018). The original intent of sentencing guidelines was to eliminate disparity in sentencing and effectively limit judges discretion (Mays & Ruddell, 2018). Since the Supreme Court cases in 2005 however, some research has found that disparity in sentencing among African American males has increased (Mays & Ruddell, 2018). I think it is a good thing to allow judges more discretion in their sentencing. As stated by Lazarus (2005), The majority of judges will likely still abide by the guidelines, but the more severe cases on the high and low end of the spectrum will allow for discretion for judges to sentence outside of the bounds of the guidelines. I think this can be a good thing. While I do think it will allow for more individualized justice, I think judges are going to hit road block with mandatory minimums still in place. I think mandatory minimums are good thing for violent crimes but not so much for property crimes or drug offenses (aside from trafficking/dealing). I think more time will be needed to see in the long term how the changes will play out but I think more work needs to be done to allow for discretion and modification of guidelines. At the end of the day the court system is limited on using discretion by laws passed by lawmakers, so if change is to occur, lawmakers need to step up and update some of our laws. I feel as though lawmakers constantly are trying to pass new laws to get their name out there and boost their reputation but they should spend more time revising older laws that have not worked out.
What are some of the particular challenges associated with inmates with special needs in jail and prison populations? Analyze the implications of releasing the elderly, the mentally ill, and other special needs inmates back into society and discuss the necessary care or medical treatments after release.
Challenges for inmates with special needs especially intellectual disability is not checking or realizing the disability exist. Many states require offenders to take IQ test and most score low but are required to take it again score normally. Others are required to tell staff that they have a disability which most are aware that they are supposed to that. This lack of diagnosing those with special needs often leads them into getting in trouble or being exploited. These individuals are also deprived of the care and accommodations they are in need of. Most inmates with special needs are also held in solitary for their own good to protect themselves and others, but solitary can lead to even more mental health issues and decline in health. It is typically very hard for those with special needs and mental health issues back into society is lack of programs for people like them, there is less housing offered and less job opportunities. Which to be successful outside of prison is to hold a job and have steady housing. Often most people with disabilities or elderly can’t live on their own, therefore they need proper care which isn’t provided. Health care is another big issue, with it being expensive to have your own private plan and most jobs providing some sort it’s hard for those to attain proper health care. We definitely need to fund the national social service and mental health infrastructure, if we provide a bigger budget then that would create more community alternatives instead of jail or incarceration.
After reading through chapter 21 in our text it was clear that we have a large amount of people in the system that have mental disorders. Some of the particular challenges associated with inmates with special needs in jail and prison system include the following. First they don’t always get the help that they need, our text explains that “Some estimates of mentally ill inmates in prisons and jails are lower than these calculations because some prisons (such as in the state of California) only treat some mental disorders, such as major mood or psychotic disorders, and do not treat other disorders, such as anxiety disorders, unless they are severe enough to warrant treatment because the inmate is experiencing painful symptoms that require urgent care” (Okada, 337). Because those who have mental disorders are not getting the proper treatment that they need we can see that they are more likely to stay within the system longer than those who are not mentally ill. The next issue that we see is “The large number of SMI in jails and prisons present a serious problem in behavior management for correctional staff, second only to overcrowding” (Okada, 343). And lastly is the undertrained staff to deal with the different disorders. “most prison systems provide correctional officers with minimal mental health training and that officers generally do not understand the nature of mental illness or how psychiatric symptoms impact behavior. This issue has led most officers to assume that most negative behaviors are manipulative and that SMI violate rules on purpose” (Okada, 343). In order to release elderly, mentally ill and other special needs inmates back into society i believe its important that they are set up with the proper care or medical treatment to help ensure there success in the community. Our text tells us that “A main issue when SMI reenter the community from prison is that offenders generally leave prison without a reentry plan, except for parole supervision. Some SMI are sent into the community with no parole supervision because they are kept in prison until their prison term expires” (Okada, 345). So i think its important that they get a re entry plan and “rehabilitative resources and behavioral health supports to reestablish stable lifestyles that address work, education, and substance abuse deficiencies” (Okada, 345).