Whether prosecutors may dispense with the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment, and may be relieved of the obligation recognized in Barber v. Page, 390 U.S. 719, 723-725 (1968), to make a good-faith effort to secure an absent witness's presence at trial, simply because the witness has been deported and is ineligible for a visa for readmission to the United States

QUESTION PRESENTED At a retrial in a criminal case, New York prosecutors were permitted to introduce prior testimony of a witness from the first trial. The witness had been deported, and, because of his criminal history, was ineligible to obtain a visa for readmission to the United States. Though there is a procedure under federal law (‘Significant Public Benefit Parole”) by which state prosecutors may secure the temporary presence of a deported witness in order for him to testify at a criminal trial (even a witness barred for life from readmission), the New York prosecutors asserted they had no obligation to utilize, or even attempt to utilize, this or any other mechanism for obtaining the witness’s live testimony. The question presented is: Whether prosecutors may dispense with the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment, and may be relieved of the obligation recognized in Barber v. Page, 390 U.S. 719, 723-725 (1968), to make a good-faith effort to secure an absent witness’s presence at trial, simply because the witness has been deported and is ineligible for a visa for readmission to the United States.