Compare and Contrast Crime Control and Due Process of the Crime Policy
Introduction
The conflict and crime framework of justice issues a high priority of the decline of criminal activities in a country through according powers to the law enforcers and prosecutors. The agreement and due process structure offers focus on the government over the locals. The role that each has are similar, in that they are financed by the government. Crime control relates nicely with the programs that are financed to prosecute with a strong hand. On the other hand, due process proponents desire limited government participation and more humane settings. The paper will focus in the similarities that exist in the application of the immigration policy. This lies criminal enforcement and following of due process with regard to the law enforcers and the judicial system.
The US is faced with a threat in its war against terror. There have been a number of crime policy acts that have been passed to create security and reorganize the government bodies in the security docket (Eldridge, et al, 2004, 32). The country has called upon the local and state law to assist in the enforcement of the crime policy, though concerns arise on the government’s steps to illegal immigrants.
The law enforcers in at all levels are quite amazed at the level of authority in terms of immigration laws. The local enforcers have little details on foreigners that they meet. Most of the times the police are not aware of what they should do with a foreigner or terrorist (Eldridge, et al. 2004, 67). Available space and finance raises as issues in the detainment of suspects or moving them to the immigration offices. Additionally, issues arises when suspects are held for fear of being termed to as racist or discrimination issues levelled on them. Moreover, the federal officers have made it worse by terming it not a crime to be in the US but a violation of civil law. Civil societies and other groups have made it hard for the law enforcers both at the state and local level from going through with their work. ICE agents have made remarks that make it hard for enforcers to undertake their work like labelling them as law abiding while some are in the country illegally.
The law enforcers in the street are well informed regarding criminal law breakers, terrorists and illegal foreigners. The Crime Information body has data on warrants of arrest and fugitives. These data helps the local and state law enforcers to be adjusted and courageous in assisting the federal body in safeguarding against terrorists and other criminal activities (Heather, and Stephen, 2012, 674). Additionally, the administrations tough stance on criminal acts would be of great significance to the federal and local and state bodies.
Dangerous acts undertaken by terrorists adds varied forms of pressure on the existing bodies. With the war being carried out between nations, officials in the government are faced with issues of having to react to activities that are attributed to be of war and criminal acts. The officials get to know that state and non-state bodies offered support to terrorists and were in a position to use weapons of destruction (Council on Foreign Relations, 2009). The officials feel that it is necessary to use excessive power to these terror groups. The use of excessive power creates new issues that is based in the military. However, the constitution accords the federal body the ability to use all power to handle criminal activity and issues of national security.
The constitution offer the US to defend and treat people who commit criminal acts against the country. The military can subdue the enemy and discipline law breaker. Vital contrast arises between the US citizens and foreigners of the country (Sainsbury, 2006, 235). The citizens of the country are well protected by the constitution against the federal body but the foreigners are not accorded the same protection. The constitution only protects the people who are within in its national setting and not those outside it. Even those of the land and against the country’s security forfeit such privileges.
It is the work of the immigration courts to hear cases of illegal aliens. What they do involves every element of the country’s immigration model. The courts are vital to illuminate and bring skilled immigrants to the US. However, these court are restricted on certain elements as just a limited number of aliens with lawsuits are sent back home. Deportation laws are rarely followed, the foreigners avoid immigration courts at a high level than accused criminals. The size of foreigners in the US are to a great extent understated (Council on Foreign Relations, 2009). The immigration judges and prosecutors that have found one guilty are not able to enforce them. This makes the number of criminal offenders in the country to be on the increase. The courts lacks order, and accountability. Therefore, it is hard for them to undertake their work when the relevant departments do not follow the laws of the country.
The US arrests criminals in the country legally and illegally. The illegal forefinger are kept in federal, state and local buildings. The federal body finances the costs that are quite expensive. The local and state bodies have raised issues of poor conditions of these structures like overcrowding and assaults. These issues go against due process of handling of suspects (Hoppe, 2002, 78). They ought to be in places that are good and less congested.
The administration is of the feeling that it handles all of the illegal immigrants as criminals and this would place pressure on the courts. The federal bodies have opted to focus on people who are of greater risk to the country like terrorists (Heather and Stephen, 2012, 687). Currently, the country accords focus to illegal aliens. This steps could be motivated by political issues like Arizona having laws that have relations to the federal statutes. Though, the states that have gone through to have these laws are more willing to enforce these laws compared to the federal authority.
Conclusion
The immigration laws are there to safeguard against national security and freedom, protect the locals and their assets. For a good period of time immigration laws have been overlooked and ignored. Diligent laws are there for the benefit of the country and protect it from negative things. The paper has been able to focus on the similarities and difference that exist in the immigration policy. The paper has focused on a number of issues that affect local and state law enforcers as well as the federal bodies. Additionally, the paper has gone on to focus on the process and factors that influence the operation of the court system. The aspect of crime control and due process has gone to affect how these bodies undertake their operation as they try to make the country safe for its locals. Though both areas of the immigration policy are aimed for the good of the country, they ought to be made to read from the same script.
Bibliography
Council on Foreign Relations 2009. U.S. Immigration Policy. J. Bush and T. McLarty, co-chairs. Independent Task Force Report No. 63. Washington.
Eldridge, T., et al. 2004. 9/11 and Terrorist Travel: Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States. Washington: National Commission on Terrorist Attacks.
Heather, C and Stephen, Y. 2012. With a Little Help from Our Feds: Understanding State Immigration Enforcement Policy Adoption in American Federalism. Policy Studies Journal. Vol. 40 Issue 4, p674-697
Hoppe, H.-H. 2002. “Natural Order, the State, and the Immigration Problem.” Journal of Libertarian Studies 16 (1): 75–97.
Sainsbury, D. 2006. Immigrants’ social rights in comparative perspective: welfare regimes, forms in immigration and immigration policy regimes. Journal of European Social Policy vol. 16 no. 3 229-244
