By Matthew Mulqueen
On December 12, 2006, the Department of Homeland Security’s
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“DHS ICE”) swept up over
12,000 meatpacking workers in the largest immigration raid in the
Nation’s history. While Secretary of Homeland Security Michael
Chertoff praised the raids as part of the Nation’s comprehensive
plan to combat illegal immigration and bolster national security,
others denounced the suspect manner in which they were carried out
and the detrimental effect they had on immigrants and American
citizens alike. Such concerns are not limited to the
workplace: Automobile stops by state and local police
officers as well as roving federal border patrols, large-scale home
raids targeting ethnic communities, and the use of immigration laws
to fight the War on Terror have exposed large numbers of
people—particularly ethnic and racial minorities—to constitutional
violations.
While most agree that law enforcement officials should adhere to
constitutional mandates, many disagree on how best to deter
violations. The exclusionary rule, for example, has garnered
both praise and criticism since the Supreme Court first adopted it
for federal law enforcement officers in 1914. In criminal
trials, the rule generally forbids the introduction of evidence
obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment in order to prove a
defendant’s guilt. In INS v. Lopez-Mendoza, however,
the Supreme Court declared that the rule would no longer apply to
civil deportation proceedings. This Note argues that
significant changes in the immigration landscape since
1984—including the criminalization of immigration law and the
increasing involvement of state and local officials in immigration
enforcement—necessitate a reexamination of Lopez-Mendoza’s
cost-benefit analysis, leading to conclusion that the deterrence
benefits from the rule’s presence would outweigh its social
costs. Readopting the exclusionary rule will have a profound
effect not only on the mechanics of government operations, but also
on the way in which we view the alien in society. Neither
change will be easy, but the landscape that emerges will provide
considerable more liberty for us all.