Immigrants and Refugees

Reno v. Ma

Human Rights First submitted an amicus brief to the Supreme Court in Reno v Ma, a case questioning the government's power to indefinitely detain an immigrant without adequate judicial review. The brief urges the Supreme Court not to distinguish unfairly between immigrants who have been living in the United States. Pointing out instances where an immigrant, legally residing in the United States for years may be found for technical legal reasons not to have "entered" the United States, the brief argues that courts should make no constitutional distinction between the two groups of immigrants. The brief alerts the Court to crucial international law prohibiting indefinite detention without adequate judicial review. The law firm of Gibbons Dunn & Crutcher served as counsel on the brief.

On June 2001, the Supreme Court held that the government cannot detain a deportable non-citizen for more than six months if there is no "significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future." The question whether the government can indefinitely detain a non-citizen who has lived in this country but has not technically "entered" is before the Supreme Court in the case of Benitez v Mata.

HRF Brief (PDF 134 KB)