Unshackling the Due Process Rights of Asylum-Seekers

Note — Volume 105, Issue 8

105 Va. L. Rev. 1667
Download PDF

The focus of this Note is the government’s excessive use of GPS monitoring ankle bracelets on asylum-seekers through the Intensive Supervision Appearance Program (“ISAP”)—an alternative-to-detention program used by Immigration and Customs Enforcement to supervise certain noncitizens in removal proceedings. This Note explores how the ISAP enrollment process violates the due process rights of asylum-seekers and how these violations have facilitated the excessive use of ankle monitors on these individuals.

The first part of this Note explores ISAP’s initial purpose and the program’s failure to meet it. ISAP originated as a cost-saving, more humane option than detention for certain high-risk noncitizens already detained. Because detaining noncitizens is expensive, ISAP was intended to alleviate some of the financial burden of the detention system by releasing certain detainees from physical detention with GPS monitoring ankle bracelets and supervision. However, ISAP has shifted from its initial focus of removing noncitizens from detention to targeting low-risk asylum-seeking individuals who otherwise would not have been detained. As a result, ISAP has failed to decrease detention costs and failed its initial purpose as an alternative option for noncitizens already detained.

The second part of this Note argues that the excessive enrollment of asylum-seekers in ISAP GPS monitoring is facilitated through due process violations. In particular, this Note argues that the enrollment process violates asylum-seekers’ due process rights by contravening substantive due process, procedural due process, and fundamental fairness requirements. Finally, the Note proposes solutions to the constitutional deficiencies and advocates for returning ISAP to its initial purpose as a true alternative to detention.

Click on a link below to access the full text of this article. These are third-party content providers and may require a separate subscription for access.

  Volume 105 / Issue 8  

What is Just Compensation?

By Wanling Su
105 Va. L. Rev. 1483

Federalism, Metropolitanism, and the Problem of States

By Richard C. Schragger
105 Va. L. Rev. 1537

Speech Across Borders

By Jennifer Daskal
105 Va. L. Rev. 1605

Unshackling the Due Process Rights of Asylum-Seekers

By Sara DeStefano
105 Va. L. Rev. 1667