190k views
1 vote
"Held that deportation was a civil, rather than criminal sanction. Civil matter does not give the same Constitutional protections as criminals."

a) Miranda v. Arizona

b) Roe v. Wade

c) Brown v. Board of Education

d) INS v. Lopez-Mendoza

1 Answer

4 votes

Final answer:

The Supreme Court case INS v. Lopez-Mendoza held that deportation is a civil proceeding and does not offer the same constitutional protections as criminal cases, which has significant implications for the rights of those facing deportation. d) INS v. Lopez-Mendoza

Step-by-step explanation:

The statement "Held that deportation was a civil, rather than criminal sanction" refers to the landmark Supreme Court case of INS v. Lopez-Mendoza. In this case, the Supreme Court determined that deportation is a civil proceeding and not a criminal one.

Therefore, the constitutional protections typically afforded to criminal defendants are not necessarily applied in the same manner to deportation proceedings. This ruling maintains a clear distinction between civil and criminal law, emphasizing that civil cases do not offer the same level of constitutional protections as criminal cases do.

The decision has far-reaching implications, influencing how deportation is seen in the context of the law and affecting the rights of those involved in deportation processes.

User JustJohn
by
7.1k points