In the United States, there are many common laws and standards according to which people and agencies organize their life and work. Due process is one of such norms defined by the Constitution to ensure that individuals cannot be deprived of life, liberty, and property (Funk & Seamon, 2020). Most court proceedings should also include due process if they contain an administrative adjudication that might lead to the loss of one of the three above-mentioned issues. An agency needs to initiate due process to identify if a hearing is required and what processes and standards can be applied and allowed during that heading (Beerman, 2020). Following these explanations, the main idea of due process is defined as positive to examine and predict the development of events and guarantee the fairness of the criminal justice system. However, there are situations when due process hurts people, and this paper aims to analyze the cases that describe its advantages and disadvantages from financial and emotional standpoints.
Today, multiple attempts, including due process, are made to predict crimes and establish appropriate punishment and crime control models in society. Attention should be paid to the quality of evidence and the number of involved parties. Before agencies, or their agents, can take action and accuse a person or a group of people of something, due process must be followed. The benefits of following this procedure are numerous, including Constitutional protection, balanced cooperation, fairness in relationships and attitudes, and the possibility for innocent people to avoid unnecessary judgments. The worth of due process can be better understood through the prism of several examples. In the 1970s, there were two critical cases that proved the importance of due process, namely Goldberg v. Kelly and Mathews v. Eldridge. The first case was a kind of foundation of due process during which the necessity of giving notice and being heard before the court was proved (Beerman, 2020). These steps helped gather enough information to create a solid background and focus on property interests and obligations. The second case demonstrated how the violation of due process affected the system and human lives.
At the same time, some people understand that due process may be associated with unfair or unnecessary procedures or unplanned or unwanted outcomes. Sometimes, additional financial costs are required, while other individuals are hurt by the necessity to gather evidence to prove their innocence. For example, in Paul v. Davis case, due process damaged the man’s reputation, although it was approved that no deprivation of constitutional rights occurred (Funk & Seamon, 2020). A similar situation with a damaged reputation and wasted time was observed in another case, Siegert v. Gilley, that questioned the worth of due process.
In general, the legal system has to cover the advantages and disadvantages of due process clearly. People should understand that they have the right to protect their life, liberty, and property. When agencies or their individual representatives plan to take action, they need to address the principle of due process and inform a person about possible outcomes, steps, and other associated procedures. In U.S. history, there are many examples of how due process could speed up or, vice versa, delay the court process. However, in most cases, the worth of this decision is proved because it gives more time to work with evidence and ensure that all activities are fair and appropriate.
References
Beerman, J. M. (2020). Inside administrative law: What matters and why. Aspen Publishing.
Funk, W., & Seamon, R. (2020). Administrative law (6th ed.). Aspen Publishing.