Category:Department of Justice
Regulating Childhood: Mass Deportations of Unaccompanied Minors
Undocumented minors are children, and the federal government should treat them as such. The attitude and justifications for harsh immigration policies are deeply rooted in the United States’ history along the Southern border and remain all too prevalent in today’s “tough on crime” approach to immigration. The Trump administration has repeatedly referred to undocumented immigrants as “criminals,” even though more than half of the 43,759 people held in ICE detention facilities have no criminal record. Yet, undocumented children appear to be the latest target of the president’s anti-immigrant crusade.
Mass Deportation and the Fall of Immigration Detention Regulations
As the Trump administration ushers in a new era of mass deportation and hysteria, “sanctuary” communities like Chicago are more important now than ever. The term “sanctuary” generally refers to states, counties or cities that have policies that limit the extent to which a local officials will cooperate with federal agencies’ efforts to deport undocumented persons. Recently, regulations concerning detention and deportations of undocumented immigrants have rapidly devolved, along with what protections they offered to these communities. Previous regulations were similarly deferential to federal enforcement agencies, particularly U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). However, the current administration is actively working to broaden federal authorities’ power to deport immigrants who are not lawfully in the U.S. and have been accused, rather than convicted, of crimes. One way the administration seeks to do so is by loosening its regulation of the methods ICE may use to conduct arrests as well as the role state and local law enforcement may play in such operations. Biden administration’s discontinuing the practice of mass immigration sweeps at worksites such as factories is just one of the limitations that has been discarded. This leaves already fragile protections for undocumented persons to the wayside, resulting in unnecessary harm and suffering to thousands of undocumented persons and citizens.
Recording Justice: How BWCs Impact Accountability and Transparency
Body-worn cameras, known as BWCs, are devices fitted to the outside of an officer’s uniform “that record interactions between community members and law enforcement officers.” These cameras record both video and audio and can be used for numerous reasons, such as providing transparency to members of the greater community and documenting evidence for future investigations or litigation purposes. BWCs have widely become an essential tool used by law enforcement agencies to enhance accountability, improve transparency, and serve as invaluable tools in legal proceedings.
Studies suggest BWCs contribute to a reduction in use-of-force incidents. The absence of a federal mandate has led to inconsistent state regulations, which has created compliance challenges and sparked legal debates. This has led to increased compliance challenges and legal debates. There have been several efforts to standardize BWC policies around the country, such as a push by the Department of Justice for a nationwide adoption and H.R. 843, a proposed legislation looking to increase BWC usage. Unfortunately, issues such as financial burdens, officer misuse, and legal barriers continually pose challenges for widespread adoption. Even with all of these obstacles, BWCs have been proven to have a significant impact in the courtroom, helping influence trial strategies and even charging decisions made by attorneys. While BWCs are not the antidote for police misconduct, they are an important step towards communities with greater accountability and justice.
Boeing’s Missteps Lead to Heavier Congressional Oversight
Boeing’s controversial history including the publicized suicide of one of its whistleblowers shortly before his deposition to TikTok videos of panels blowing off mid-air or planes catching fire have prompted public scrutiny. These events, mainly the latter, have raised also questions about Boeing’s compliance with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations the Department of Justice (DOJ) rulings. However, this is not the first time these concerns have come to light.
Turbulent Times: Boeing’s Ongoing Struggles with Safety and Compliance
Boeing is the world’s largest aerospace company, and the leading manufacturer of commercial jetliners. Its reputation as a highly profitable and respected corporation has dwindled over the last couple of years, and 2024 appears to be its worst year yet. Safety incidents involving particular Boeing models have triggered immediate safety concerns and have unearthed significant cultural and ethical challenges within the company. Actions of regulatory bodies tasked with ensuring company safety compliance and accident prevention have revealed a larger-scale issue with aviation industry safety, and the lack of meaningful reform by the Department of Justice (DOJ).
Justice for Murder Victims Act: Abolishing the ‘Year and a Day Rule’ and the Effects on Federal Homicide Prosecutions
Picture this: A friends loved one is violently attacked one day. Doctors inform the family that there is a high likelihood they will die without a life support technique. The patient is put on life support and for months, despite no progress, friends and family remain hopeful. Around the one-year anniversary of the attack, the family learns of the “year-and-a-day” rule. The “ ” rule is a rule providing that a defendant cannot be convicted of homicide if their victim dies more than a year and a day after the act occurred. With this in mind, what decision should the family make? Do they abandon the hope they keep or forgo an opportunity to hold the perpetrator liable? This is an impossible decision to make and an unfair one to force upon grieving families. The “year-and-a-day” rule has been frequently criticized as due to the advancements in modern medicine that allow victims to live for an extended period of time after the actions against them. Several but it has not been eradicated at a federal level. Putting an end to the “year-and-a-day” rule would have wide-reaching effects on federal prosecution of violent offenders.