The Authority of the Search
As an immigration officer, I have the duty to protect the country against the threat created by the illegal immigrants. The Immigration and Naturalization Act gives me the power to search and even detain immigrants entering the country through contravention of the immigration law (Golash-Boza, 2015). Hence, I am within the law for performing the search on the immigrant whenever I sense a suspicious conduct. For the purpose of protecting the country from international crime and the urgency in dealing with immigrants, the process of obtaining the warrant can be detrimental.
The Authority of the Detention
Following identification of suspicious behavior, including the three passports, I found the legal grounds for detaining the suspect for further questioning and investigations. As the immigration officer, I have the authority under the Immigration and Naturalization Act, 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101 et seq. to detain the suspect (Golash-Boza, 2015). The law gives me the authority to hold the alien to prevent the risk of entering the country illegally and possibly committing crime.
The Rights of the Detainee
When arresting an American citizen, there are explicit rights that are offered by the constitution, including the Miranda rights and the right to a legal representation. The same does not apply to the arrests and detention of illegal immigrants (Al-Khatib, 2014). Therefore, the detainee does not have the rights under the US constitution. The arresting officer does not necessarily have to read the Miranda rights, and in case the detainee seeks the services of a lawyer, then he/she should be prepared to pay for one.
The Immigration and Naturalization Act is the law involved in the situation. Title 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101 et seq., gives the officer authority to arrest, Title 8 U.S.C. § 1225 allows for examination and searches of the aliens, even without a warrant, and Title 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a) allows arresting with a warrant. The applicability of the Fourth Amendment to cases involving illegal aliens remains a controversial issue in the country (Resnik, 2014). However, the legal statutes are clear about the authority of the immigration officer in dealing with illegal aliens.
The End Justifies the Means
I believe that in this case, the end justifies the means. The country is currently dealing with an influx of illegal immigrants who pose a challenge to the security of the country. The illegal immigrants mostly enter the country with smuggled goods, drugs, and even people (Totten & Cobkit, 2013). Hence, allowing a suspicious person to walk free because of the failure to have the warrant is risky. Hence, the law should be stricter and allow for arrests to be made whenever the risk of letting go of a suspect is great.
A Case of Illegal Immigration
An illegal immigration occurs without legal documents that would allow entry into the country. In this case, the situation is a contravention of the immigration laws in the country because the suspect was holding three passports, indicating that his intentions were not justifiable (Yeldandi, 2016). Any legal person coming into the country should have only one such document.
A no Passport Situation
The situation would not be different if there were no passports found. Having invalid documents or no documents at all amounts to a violation of the immigration laws (Yeldandi, 2016). Hence, the suspect would still be arrested and detained if he was found to have no passport.