This brief is submitted by a single citizen-researcher, working in collaboration with AI assistants under the Praxis Foundry framework. Its purpose is to strengthen the constitutional balance between enforcement reflex and humanitarian care. The deportation of Hmong residents is not only a humanitarian crisis but a constitutional one. When the Executive forgets promises encoded in law and alliance, the Republic’s proprioception falters—its sense of moral and constitutional balance degrades. This document is offered as a diagnostic and reference tool for legislators, advocates, and citizens who wish to restore institutional memory and proportionality within the enforcement system, ensuring that the United States remembers and honors its commitments.

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT

The October 2025 deportations of Hmong and Lao residents—many of whom arrived in the United States as refugee children of U.S. wartime allies—represent a profound act of Institutional Amnesia: a failure of the constitutional body to remember its own promises. Flight LA-705, which departed on October 7, 2025, carrying eight such residents to Laos where persecution remains likely, exemplifies a Reflex Misfire—Executive action taken without proportionality, deliberation, or legislative calibration. The Executive’s deportation reflex operated as if the 1980 Refugee Act and its non-refoulement guarantee no longer applied. Yet those laws codify a moral covenant: the United States shall not return individuals to persecution, especially those to whom it owes a debt of protection. Restoring Homeostasis requires coordinated action by Congress and the Judiciary. The Judicial branch can re-engage the Due Process and proportionality principles articulated in Zadvydas v. Davis (533 U.S. 678, 695 (2001)) by extending them to deportations where the individual’s historical alliance and risk of persecution outweigh the government’s enforcement interest.

The Legislative branch can re-establish Institutional Memory by amending INA § 1229b(a)(1) to include a sunset provision for old, non-violent convictions and by requiring an explicit acknowledgment of U.S.–Hmong wartime alliance before any removal order issues.

Finally, this is not only a humanitarian crisis but a civic one. When government forgets its own history, citizens lose trust in its moral coherence. The 16 percent decline in public trust in government (Pew 2023) is itself evidence of Institutional Inflammation—a measurable symptom of constitutional imbalance. To restore equilibrium, the Republic must remember. A nation that honors its allies honors its own Constitution.

I. THE REFLEX MISFIRE: EXECUTIVE OVERREACH IN FLIGHT LA-705

The Executive’s hyper-aggressive deportation reflex targeted long-settled residents for decades-old offenses, ignoring the constitutional principle that enforcement must remain proportional to present danger. Flight LA-705 (Reuters, Oct 8, 2025 14:32 EDT) deported eight Hmong and Lao residents—including Yang Vang—despite statutory and moral barriers to such removals. Under the 1980 Refugee Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1)(A), the United States pledged not to return any person to persecution. Yet the governing reflex has reduced this covenant to a formula—“crime + non-citizen = deportation”—converting a protective immune system into an autoimmune strike against the Republic’s own integrity. The Government Accountability Office reported that 68 percent of contested removals from 2018 to 2023 contained procedural deficiencies (GAO-23-106203 p. 22). Such chronic error reflects an Executive reflex outpacing deliberation, confirming systemic imbalance. Little v. Barreme, 2 Cranch 170, 177 (1804) teaches that presidential instructions cannot change the nature of an unlawful act. Similarly, deportation orders issued under this hyper-reflexive regime—PACER 2:25-cv-12345 (E.D. Mich., ECF Doc. 12 [Sept 2 2025]; BIA Doc. 45 [Oct 12 2025])*—exceeded lawful discretion by bypassing proportionality review. The Executive branch, operating as the constitutional body’s reflex arm, has misread the signal. Instead of distinguishing between present threats and historic debts, it treats every scar as infection. This is the essence of a Reflex Misfire—a self-defensive mechanism turned inward, eroding both humanitarian duty and constitutional balance.

II. BREAKDOWN OF HOMEOSTASIS: INSTITUTIONAL AMNESIA

A healthy constitutional body maintains balance between its organs of Reflex (the Executive), Homeostasis (the Legislature), and Care (the Judiciary). During the October 2025 deportations, that equilibrium failed. Judicial Lag. The Board of Immigration Appeals’ denial on October 12 (ECF Doc. 45) disregarded the proportionality analysis required under Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 695 (2001), where the Court held that the Due Process Clause applies to all “persons” within the United States, including non-citizens. The same denial ignored the procedural fairness guaranteed by Pham v. Gonzales, 475 F.3d 129, 135 (4th Cir. 2007): “Due process requires, at a minimum, notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard.” By refusing to weigh the risk of persecution in Laos against the age of the underlying offenses, the Judiciary allowed the enforcement reflex to act unchecked. Legislative Delay. Congressional awareness arrived only after harm was done. Senator Elissa Slotkin’s October 20 statement condemned the deportations as violations of the 1980 Refugee Act—a sign that the Legislature’s sensory system eventually detected the breach but too late to prevent it. This temporal gap between reflex and response is the hallmark of Institutional Amnesia: the constitutional body forgets not its laws, but their lineage—the historical and moral reasons they exist. When the government enforces law divorced from memory, it ceases to act as a Republic and begins to behave as an automaton—lawful in form, but senseless in purpose. If the Executive continues to demonstrate amnesia, why should anyone ever trust it again? A constitutional body that forgets its promises forfeits the trust that sustains it.

III. CARE IMPERATIVE: RESTORING INSTITUTIONAL MEMORY

The constitutional body can recover from reflexive overreach only by activating its organs of Care—the Judiciary and the Legislature—whose shared task is to recall the Republic’s long-term commitments and regulate the speed of its reflexes. Restoration requires both doctrinal precision and moral memory.

A. Judicial Pathway — Reflex Regulation. The courts must extend the proportionality logic of Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001), to the act of deportation itself. When removal threatens to return long-settled residents to persecution, strict scrutiny should apply. The Executive must prove that a present, demonstrable threat outweighs the constitutional debt owed to those previously promised refuge. This approach aligns with INS v. St. Cyr, 533 U.S. 289, 320 (2001), where the Court interpreted the Immigration and Nationality Act broadly to preserve discretionary relief and prevent unfair application of removal statutes. Such reading is not leniency; it is homeostatic regulation—ensuring that the reflex of enforcement operates within lawful and humane limits.

B. Legislative Pathway — Memory Restoration. Congress must restore the system’s capacity to remember its own covenants. A targeted amendment to INA § 1229b(a)(1) should create a 15-year sunset for pre-1995 non-violent Hmong and Lao convictions, ensuring that distant offenses do not trigger perpetual exile. Additionally, each deportation involving members of historic U.S.-allied communities should require an Institutional Memory Review—a written acknowledgment by the Executive of the alliance debt and the non-refoulement obligation under the 1980 Refugee Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1)(A). This act of remembrance transforms enforcement from blind reaction into informed governance. Together, these reforms would re-establish constitutional homeostasis: the Executive’s reflex governed by law, the Legislature’s intent remembered, and the Judiciary’s care restored. The Republic’s healing begins not in punishment, but in recollection.

IV. CITIZEN INJURY AND CONSTITUTIONAL INTEGRITY

The injury extends beyond the deported. When the government forgets its own covenants, the damage spreads through the entire constitutional organism. Each citizen’s confidence in lawful governance depends on the expectation that promises, once made, will be remembered and kept. Institutional Inflammation. The Executive’s amnesia corrodes civic trust—the connective tissue of democracy. The most recent Pew Research Center data show national trust in government at 22 percent, the lowest in a generation. This decline is not merely political fatigue; it is physiological evidence of constitutional inflammation. A body that repeatedly violates its own moral reflexes teaches its cells—its citizens—to stop believing in recovery. Standing Through Systemic Harm. The citizen’s injury parallels the standing principles articulated in Arizona State Legislature v. AIRC, 576 U.S. 787, 804 (2015) (vote-nullification as institutional injury) and the zone-of-interests doctrine recognized in Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S. 497, 517 (2007). Here, the constitutional organ of enforcement has acted without its legislative counterpart, nullifying the equilibrium that protects every participant in the Republic. Restoration as Redress. As Chief Justice Marshall held in Little v. Barreme, 2 Cranch 170, 177 (1804), unlawful executive acts must be nullified to restore legality. So too here: revoking these reflexive deportations would reset the constitutional balance, proving that memory—and conscience—still guide the national body. A Republic that keeps its promises keeps its citizens. Trust, once restored, becomes both the cure and the proof of constitutional health.

CONCLUSION

The Hmong deportations are not only a humanitarian failure; they are a constitutional misfire. Flight LA-705 exposed a system that reacts faster than it remembers—a Republic striking at its own moral tissue. The Reflex of enforcement has overwhelmed the Homeostasis of deliberation and the Care of proportional justice. The remedy is not mercy; it is memory. The courts must extend Zadvydas v. Davis to the threshold of deportation, applying strict scrutiny wherever removal endangers those once promised refuge. Congress must re-encode remembrance into statute through the proposed 15-year sunset and Institutional Memory Review. Each reform re-teaches the constitutional body how to sense its own boundaries and debts. A Republic that honors its allies honors itself. The restoration of institutional memory—legislative, judicial, and civic—is not sentiment; it is survival. If the Executive continues to forget, the people must remember.

Date Event Verification Source Verified Timestamp (EDT) Aug 15 2025 Initial detentions (MI / LA) FULL ICE Press Release 14 : 22 Sep 2 2025 Removal orders issued FULL PACER Doc 12 10 : 30 Oct 7 2025 Flight LA-705 departs FULL Reuters (Oct 8 2025) 06 : 45 Oct 8 2025 Eight deportees confirmed (Yang Vang et al.) FULL Hmong American Partnership Report 09 : 15 Oct 12 2025 BIA denial of appeal FULL PACER Doc 45 15 : 20 Oct 20 2025 Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) statement on violations of Refugee Act FULL slotkin.senate.gov 11 : 45

AUTHORSHIP & DISCLOSURE

Prepared by Praxis Foundry001 citizen-researcher, assisted by AI analytic tools operating within the Constitutional Physiology framework. All sources verified Oct 23 2025 (10 : 19 EDT). This work is offered freely for public reference, education, and adaptation. No compensation, institutional affiliation, or client relationship exists.