Expedited Removal in 2020. An Analysis of the Department of Homeland Security vs. Thuraisingam Supreme Court Case:
Humanities
Critical Race and Ethnic Studies
This paper analyzes the Department of Homeland Security vs. Thuraisingam Supreme Court Case and the effects the Supreme Court decision will have on the legal framework of asylum in the United States. This paper discusses the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA), which authorized immigration officials to designate expedited removals separately from the judicial branch. Moreover, I discuss how expedited removal allowed the federal government to rely on the “refugee crisis” myth and ill-equipped officials to blatantly target and punish asylum seekers. In my analysis of the Department of Homeland Security vs. Thuraisingam Supreme Court Decision, I found that the Supreme Court reestablishes immigration officials' powers and the fabrication of uncontrollable waves of refugees. Furthermore, the Supreme Court Decision does so by fixating on the illegality of Thruaisingam's physical body as an asylum seeker. In conclusion, my research paper exposes how the 2020 Supreme Court Decision confirms that crossing the border without authorization entails limited rights, even when border crossers are potential asylees.
