Clark v. Martinez
Encyclopedia
Clark v. Martinez was a United States Supreme Court case about the detention of inadmissible immigrants during the deportation
process. An alien can be found inadmissible on the grounds of poor health, criminal history, substance trafficking, prostitution/human trafficking, money laundering, terrorist activity, ect. The deportation process requires a ruling from an immigration judge for violating immigration laws. The case attempted to resolve the conflicting rulings made by the 9th and 11th circuits on whether Zadvydas v. Davis
(2001) was applicable to inadmissible immigrants, Sergio Martinez and Daniel Benitez. The cases of Martinez and Benitez were later consolidated by the Supreme Court.
Zadvydas v. Davis states that the government can detain admissible aliens/ aliens who have already been granted citizenship to the U.S. only long enough beyond the 90 day removal period if necessary for deportation. If deportation is unforeseeable then the immigrant must be released. Zadvydas v. Davis fails to define if immigrants inadmissible to the U.S. have these same protections.
The Supreme Court decision (7-2) found that Zadvydas v. Davis was in fact applicable to inadmissible immigrants. In the case of Martinez and Benitez where deportation to Cuba
is implausible, further detention is unnecessary. The court however did not grant constitutional protection from indefinite detention to inadmissible immigrants.
. By the time they had applied for citizenship through the Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act
; which allows Cubans who have been living in the US for a year to apply. Both men, however, had racked up significant criminal charges thus they could not qualify for the adjustment from refugee to citizen.
“When Martinez sought adjustment in 1991, he had been convicted of assault with a deadly weapon in Rhode Island
and burglary in California
, Pet. for Cert. in No. 03-878, at 7; when Benitez sought adjustment in 1985, he had been convicted of grand theft in Florida
, 337 F. 3d, at 1290. Both men were convicted of additional felonies after their adjustment applications were denied: Martinez of petty theft with a prior conviction (1996), assault with a deadly weapon (1998), and attempted oral copulation by force (1999), see Pet. for Cert. in No. 03-878, at 7-8; Benitez of two counts of armed robbery, armed burglary of a conveyance, armed burglary of a structure, aggravated battery, carrying a concealed firearm, unlawful possession of a firearm while engaged in a criminal offense, and unlawful possession, sale, or delivery of a firearm with an altered serial number (1993), see 337 F. 3d, at 1290-1291.”
Both Martinez and Benitez had their parole revoked and faced deportation by Immigration and Naturalization Services “INS”. While being detained by INS, Martinez and Benitez, each filed a petition for the writ of habeas corpus to challenge their indefinite detention.
Under Martinez v. Smith 30th October, 2002, Martinez was granted petition by the District Court for the District of Oregon in the 11th circuit and was to be released at the digression of INS. Whereas Benitez was denied petition by the 9th circuit District Court for the Northern District of Florida under Benitez v. Wallis 11th July, 2002. These contracting interpretations of Zadvydas v. Davis
led to the cases being consolidated by the United States Supreme Court.
Martinez was held by INS until after the decision was made by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2005. Benitez was paroled and released to family sponsors, two days after his case was heard by the Supreme Court, 15th October, 2004.
, was a series boatlifts that took place from the 15th of April to the 31st of October 1980. The boatlift was responsible for the transport of 125,000 Cubans from the port of Mariel to southern Florida. Within this time frame Fidel Castro allowed any Cuban who wanted to leave and had a permit to do so through the [Port of Mariel]]. The United States Coast Guard
began to see numerous personal vessels flood out of Key West
and Miami, Florida
. The first flood out of the U.S. were 20-40 ft pleasure boats belonging to Cuban American’s who had relatives in Cuba. By the 21st, a second flood of Cuban American’s attempting to rent or buy boats came. Not long after their departure for Mariel the Coast Guard began to receive distress calls and several search and rescue mission were required.
Of the 125,000 refugees 23,00 had previous criminal charges in Cuba
, under U.S. law 2,746 were considered criminals. Many of the 2,746 criminals that applied for citizenship under the 1984 Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act were declared unfit due to the alien's disciplinary record and criminal record.
. Zadvydas v. Davis ruled that admissible aliens/ aliens who had already been granted citizenship facing deportation may not be detained longer than the 90 day removal period. The use of “may” and “admissible” in the passage below led to confusion and was clarified in Clark v. Martinez.
“The majority's unanchored interpretation ignores another indication that the Attorney General's detention discretion was not limited to this truncated period. Section 1231(a)(6) permits continued detention not only of removable aliens but also of inadmissible aliens, for instance those stopped at the border before entry. Congress provides for detention of both categories within the same statutory grant of authority. Accepting the majority's interpretation, then, there are two possibilities, neither of which is sustainable. On the one hand, it may be that the majority's rule applies to both categories of aliens, in which case we are asked to assume that Congress intended to restrict the discretion it could confer upon the Attorney General so that all inadmissible aliens must be allowed into our community within six months. On the other hand, the majority's logic might be that inadmissible and removable aliens can be treated differently. Yet it is not a plausible construction of § 1231(a)(6) to imply a time limit as to one class but not to another. The text does not admit of this possibility. As a result, it is difficult to see why "[a]liens who have not yet gained initial admission to this country would present a very different question."
The idea “[a]liens who have not yet gained initial admission to this country would present a very different question," presented in Zadvydas v. Davis was the central concern in Clark v. Martinez.
Clark v. Martinez also poses the controversial question of where aliens physically are while their status is being determined. "One of the government’s tactics has been to deny release to people who are “paroled” into the United States, meaning that they are physically allowed into the country while their status is being determined. Technically, they are not considered to be “in” the country"
Sergio Suarez Martinez can be found as a registered sex offender, otherwise his whereabouts are unknown.
Deportation
Deportation means the expulsion of a person or group of people from a place or country. Today it often refers to the expulsion of foreign nationals whereas the expulsion of nationals is called banishment, exile, or penal transportation...
process. An alien can be found inadmissible on the grounds of poor health, criminal history, substance trafficking, prostitution/human trafficking, money laundering, terrorist activity, ect. The deportation process requires a ruling from an immigration judge for violating immigration laws. The case attempted to resolve the conflicting rulings made by the 9th and 11th circuits on whether Zadvydas v. Davis
Zadvydas v. Davis
Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 , was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that held that indefinite detention of unremovable admitted immigrants under the plenary power doctrine was subject to Constitutional limitations...
(2001) was applicable to inadmissible immigrants, Sergio Martinez and Daniel Benitez. The cases of Martinez and Benitez were later consolidated by the Supreme Court.
Zadvydas v. Davis states that the government can detain admissible aliens/ aliens who have already been granted citizenship to the U.S. only long enough beyond the 90 day removal period if necessary for deportation. If deportation is unforeseeable then the immigrant must be released. Zadvydas v. Davis fails to define if immigrants inadmissible to the U.S. have these same protections.
The Supreme Court decision (7-2) found that Zadvydas v. Davis was in fact applicable to inadmissible immigrants. In the case of Martinez and Benitez where deportation to Cuba
Cuba
The Republic of Cuba is an island nation in the Caribbean. The nation of Cuba consists of the main island of Cuba, the Isla de la Juventud, and several archipelagos. Havana is the largest city in Cuba and the country's capital. Santiago de Cuba is the second largest city...
is implausible, further detention is unnecessary. The court however did not grant constitutional protection from indefinite detention to inadmissible immigrants.
History
Cubans Sergio Suarez Martinez and Daniel Benitez gained access to the US in June 1980’s via the Mariel BoatliftMariel boatlift
The Mariel boatlift was a mass emigration of Cubans who departed from Cuba's Mariel Harbor for the United States between April 15 and October 31, 1980....
. By the time they had applied for citizenship through the Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act
Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act
The Cuban Adjustment Act , Public Law 89-732, is a United States federal law enacted on November 2, 1966. The law applies to any native or citizen of Cuba who has been inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States after January 1, 1959 and has been physically present for at least one...
; which allows Cubans who have been living in the US for a year to apply. Both men, however, had racked up significant criminal charges thus they could not qualify for the adjustment from refugee to citizen.
“When Martinez sought adjustment in 1991, he had been convicted of assault with a deadly weapon in Rhode Island
Rhode Island
The state of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, more commonly referred to as Rhode Island , is a state in the New England region of the United States. It is the smallest U.S. state by area...
and burglary in California
California
California is a state located on the West Coast of the United States. It is by far the most populous U.S. state, and the third-largest by land area...
, Pet. for Cert. in No. 03-878, at 7; when Benitez sought adjustment in 1985, he had been convicted of grand theft in Florida
Florida
Florida is a state in the southeastern United States, located on the nation's Atlantic and Gulf coasts. It is bordered to the west by the Gulf of Mexico, to the north by Alabama and Georgia and to the east by the Atlantic Ocean. With a population of 18,801,310 as measured by the 2010 census, it...
, 337 F. 3d, at 1290. Both men were convicted of additional felonies after their adjustment applications were denied: Martinez of petty theft with a prior conviction (1996), assault with a deadly weapon (1998), and attempted oral copulation by force (1999), see Pet. for Cert. in No. 03-878, at 7-8; Benitez of two counts of armed robbery, armed burglary of a conveyance, armed burglary of a structure, aggravated battery, carrying a concealed firearm, unlawful possession of a firearm while engaged in a criminal offense, and unlawful possession, sale, or delivery of a firearm with an altered serial number (1993), see 337 F. 3d, at 1290-1291.”
Both Martinez and Benitez had their parole revoked and faced deportation by Immigration and Naturalization Services “INS”. While being detained by INS, Martinez and Benitez, each filed a petition for the writ of habeas corpus to challenge their indefinite detention.
Under Martinez v. Smith 30th October, 2002, Martinez was granted petition by the District Court for the District of Oregon in the 11th circuit and was to be released at the digression of INS. Whereas Benitez was denied petition by the 9th circuit District Court for the Northern District of Florida under Benitez v. Wallis 11th July, 2002. These contracting interpretations of Zadvydas v. Davis
Zadvydas v. Davis
Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 , was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that held that indefinite detention of unremovable admitted immigrants under the plenary power doctrine was subject to Constitutional limitations...
led to the cases being consolidated by the United States Supreme Court.
Martinez was held by INS until after the decision was made by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2005. Benitez was paroled and released to family sponsors, two days after his case was heard by the Supreme Court, 15th October, 2004.
Mariel Boatlift 1980
The Mariel BoatliftMariel boatlift
The Mariel boatlift was a mass emigration of Cubans who departed from Cuba's Mariel Harbor for the United States between April 15 and October 31, 1980....
, was a series boatlifts that took place from the 15th of April to the 31st of October 1980. The boatlift was responsible for the transport of 125,000 Cubans from the port of Mariel to southern Florida. Within this time frame Fidel Castro allowed any Cuban who wanted to leave and had a permit to do so through the [Port of Mariel]]. The United States Coast Guard
United States Coast Guard
The United States Coast Guard is a branch of the United States Armed Forces and one of the seven U.S. uniformed services. The Coast Guard is a maritime, military, multi-mission service unique among the military branches for having a maritime law enforcement mission and a federal regulatory agency...
began to see numerous personal vessels flood out of Key West
Key West
Key West is an island in the Straits of Florida on the North American continent at the southernmost tip of the Florida Keys. Key West is home to the southernmost point in the Continental United States; the island is about from Cuba....
and Miami, Florida
Miami, Florida
Miami is a city located on the Atlantic coast in southeastern Florida and the county seat of Miami-Dade County, the most populous county in Florida and the eighth-most populous county in the United States with a population of 2,500,625...
. The first flood out of the U.S. were 20-40 ft pleasure boats belonging to Cuban American’s who had relatives in Cuba. By the 21st, a second flood of Cuban American’s attempting to rent or buy boats came. Not long after their departure for Mariel the Coast Guard began to receive distress calls and several search and rescue mission were required.
Of the 125,000 refugees 23,00 had previous criminal charges in Cuba
Cuba
The Republic of Cuba is an island nation in the Caribbean. The nation of Cuba consists of the main island of Cuba, the Isla de la Juventud, and several archipelagos. Havana is the largest city in Cuba and the country's capital. Santiago de Cuba is the second largest city...
, under U.S. law 2,746 were considered criminals. Many of the 2,746 criminals that applied for citizenship under the 1984 Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act were declared unfit due to the alien's disciplinary record and criminal record.
Controversy
Much of the controversy behind Clark v. Martinez came from the ambiguous wording in Zadvydas v. DavisZadvydas v. Davis
Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 , was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that held that indefinite detention of unremovable admitted immigrants under the plenary power doctrine was subject to Constitutional limitations...
. Zadvydas v. Davis ruled that admissible aliens/ aliens who had already been granted citizenship facing deportation may not be detained longer than the 90 day removal period. The use of “may” and “admissible” in the passage below led to confusion and was clarified in Clark v. Martinez.
“The majority's unanchored interpretation ignores another indication that the Attorney General's detention discretion was not limited to this truncated period. Section 1231(a)(6) permits continued detention not only of removable aliens but also of inadmissible aliens, for instance those stopped at the border before entry. Congress provides for detention of both categories within the same statutory grant of authority. Accepting the majority's interpretation, then, there are two possibilities, neither of which is sustainable. On the one hand, it may be that the majority's rule applies to both categories of aliens, in which case we are asked to assume that Congress intended to restrict the discretion it could confer upon the Attorney General so that all inadmissible aliens must be allowed into our community within six months. On the other hand, the majority's logic might be that inadmissible and removable aliens can be treated differently. Yet it is not a plausible construction of § 1231(a)(6) to imply a time limit as to one class but not to another. The text does not admit of this possibility. As a result, it is difficult to see why "[a]liens who have not yet gained initial admission to this country would present a very different question."
The idea “[a]liens who have not yet gained initial admission to this country would present a very different question," presented in Zadvydas v. Davis was the central concern in Clark v. Martinez.
Clark v. Martinez also poses the controversial question of where aliens physically are while their status is being determined. "One of the government’s tactics has been to deny release to people who are “paroled” into the United States, meaning that they are physically allowed into the country while their status is being determined. Technically, they are not considered to be “in” the country"
Response
Daniel Benitez died 29th March, 2005, just months after his case was decided in January, 2005.Sergio Suarez Martinez can be found as a registered sex offender, otherwise his whereabouts are unknown.