Law Commons^™

First Amendment Defenses To Alien Transportation Crimes, Charquia Wright

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Florida law now prohibits the transportation of undocumented aliens into the state. Briefings characterize these laws as unconstitutionally preempting federal immigration law and federal due process rights. Despite this emphasis on due process, field, and conflict preemption unconstitutionality, few have addressed the First Amendment implications of human smuggling prosecutions of natural and some corporate persons. The Supreme Court’s Free Exercise precedent protects the religious freedoms of natural persons and some corporations. Under state alien transportation laws, these freedoms cease to exist. Because the Supreme Court has extended these religious protections to some corporations, they too are entitled to First Amendment …

Creating A Racialized Liminal Status: The 1790 Act And Interstitial Citizenship, Rose Cuison-Villazor

William & Mary Law Review

This Comment began with De La Ysla’s case to highlight the political status that Filipinos held when the Philippines was a U.S. territory. This Comment argues that this status, which a court would later describe as a “hybrid status ... the so-called ‘non-citizen national,’” was a racialized liminal political status with roots in the 1790 Naturalization Act (1790 Act). Professors Jack Chin and Paul Finkelman claim that the 1790 Act played a critical role in shaping “the very composition of the people of the United States” by including the “free white person” clause in the country’s first naturalization law. One …

Paradoxical Citizenship, Amanda Frost

William & Mary Law Review

In their article, The “Free White Person” Clause of the Naturalization Act of 1790 as Super-Statute, Gabriel J. Chin and Paul Finkelman make a powerful case that the Naturalization Act of 1790 is a “super-statute” that has shaped not only U.S. immigration law and policy, but also America’s conception of itself as a “White nation.”

[...]

This Comment explores the conflict between the Naturalization Act’s racial restrictions on citizenship (and its proponents’ vision of the United States as a White nation) and the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause (and its proponents’ vision of the United States as a multiracial …

The "Free White Person" Clause Of The Naturalization Act Of 1790 As Super-Statute, Gabriel J. Chin, Paul Finkelman

William & Mary Law Review

A body of legal scholarship persuasively contends that some judicial decisions are so important that they should be considered part of the canon of constitutional law including, unquestionably, Marbury v. Madison and Brown v. Board of Education. Some decisions, while blunders, were nevertheless profoundly influential in undermining justice and the public good. Scholars call cases such as Dred Scott v. Sandford and Plessy v. Ferguson the anticanon. Recognizing the contemporary centrality of statutes, Professors William Eskridge and John Ferejohn propose that certain federal laws should be recognized as part of legal canon because of their extraordinary influence and duration. These …

Afterward: A Reply To Commentators, Gabriel J. Chin, Paul Finkelman

William & Mary Law Review

Authors Gabriel J. Chin and Paul Finkelman respond to the comments on their article, The "Free White Person" Clause of the Naturalization Act of 1790 as Super-Statute.

Reparative Citizenship, Amanda Frost

William & Mary Law Review

The United States has granted reparations for a variety of historical injustices, from imprisonment of Japanese Americans during the Second World War to the Tuskegee syphilis experiments. Yet the nation has never considered reparations for 150 years of discriminatory immigration and citizenship policies that excluded millions based on race, gender, and political opinion—including some who are alive today. This Article argues that the United States can atone for these transgressions by granting “reparative citizenship” to those individuals and their descendants, following the lead of several European countries who have recently provided such relief for those wrongly expelled or excluded in …

Attachment Issues: Assessing The Relationship Between Newcomers And The Constitution, Ashley Mantha-Hollands

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Are you attached to the principles of the U.S. Constitution? How do you prove it—do you feel it, or just know it? What role does it play in your daily life as a citizen? Ever since one of the first acts of the U.S. Congress, the Naturalization Act of 1795, applicants for citizenship have been required to demonstrate that they are “attached to the principles of the [C]onstitution of the United States.” This requirement has been at the forefront of fierce debates in U.S. constitutional history and, although it has had limited usage after WWII, it has recently been brought …

Freedom In The Balance: Procedural Due Process Rights And The Burden Of Proof In Detention Hearings In Immigration Removal Proceedings, Colin Brady

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Part I of this Note considers the statutory and regulatory basis for immigration detention. Part II reviews prior cases decided by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) that bear on the question. Part III discusses how the Supreme Court has addressed previous procedural due process concerns within the immigration system and how lower courts have reacted. Part IV lays out how the Supreme Court has conceptualized the constitutional due process rights extended to noncitizens and how that has changed over the years. Part V considers how other categories of individuals are treated with respect to involuntary detention and the burden …

Promoting Healing And Avoiding Retraumatization: A Proposal To Improve Mental Health Care For Detained Unaccompanied Minors Through A Best Interests Of The Child Standard, Francesca J. Babetski

William & Mary Law Review

Part I of this Note will describe the circuit split. It will provide background on the A.M. [A.M. v. Luzerne County Juvenile Detention Center] and Doe 4 cases, including an explanation of the major precedents on which the Third and Fourth Circuits based their respective decisions. Then, Part II will argue that A.M. and its deliberate indifference standard cannot appropriately be applied in cases involving detained unaccompanied minors, also called Unaccompanied Alien Children (UACs). This almost twenty-year-old standard does not consider the latest information about immigration policy and the unique mental health needs of UACs such as Doe …

Limited Protection: The Impact Of Illegal Entry On Due Process Rights In Expedited Removal Proceedings, Sun Shen

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

[...] This Note argues that illegal entry often limits the scope of asylum seekers’ due process rights in court and negatively impacts the asylum process in a way that runs afoul with the spirit of due process and fairness. Asylum eligibility should not hinge on whether entry is legal, but whether applicants are able to meet the evidentiary burden. Conditioning asylum seekers’ procedural due process rights on the legality of entry creates arbitrary asylum results and carries high risks of sending back asylum seekers to danger, simply because they were not able to obtain valid travel documents from the governments …

Weighing Pain: How The Harm Of Immigration Detention Must Be Factored In Custody Decisions, Linus Chan

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

The United States is currently in the midst of a “third wave of potential pretrial detention reform.” And while certain reforms are gaining traction in an effort to reduce pretrial criminal detention, efforts to do the same for immigration detention have lagged. Reformers and abolitionists make the case that immigration detention needs to be either restricted or eliminated entirely. Nonetheless, the number of people held in detention for immigration purposes rises year after year. Not only do the numbers of people in immigration detention grow, but the systems in place have grown less concerned with the harsh consequences of detention …

The Emerging Lessons Of Trump V. Hawaii, Shalini Bhargava Ray

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In the years since the Supreme Court decided Trump v. Hawaii, federal district courts have adjudicated dozens of rights-based challenges to executive action in immigration law. Plaintiffs, including U.S. citizens, civil rights organizations, and immigrants themselves, have alleged violations of the First Amendment and the equal protection component of the Due Process Clause with some regularity based on President Trump’s animus toward immigrants. This Article assesses Hawaii’s impact on these challenges to immigration policy, and it offers two observations. First, Hawaii has amplified federal courts’ practice of privileging administrative law claims over constitutional ones. For example, courts considering …

"De-Americanization" During The Trump Administration: Derivative Citizenship And Deceased Parents In The United States, Katheryn J. Maldonado

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

The Trump Administration’s war on immigration will be marked in history as one replete with white supremacy and terror. Much attention has been focused in the realm of undocumented immigrants, detention centers, and family separations because of the pervasiveness of those issues and the gravity of the human rights violations occurring in the United States. However, little focus has been given to immigrants who are lawful permanent residents or naturalized citizens at risk of denaturalization and deprivation of their constitutional rights. This Note highlights the effects of the Trump Administration’s war on immigration on citizens and green card holders in …

Relentless Pursuits: Reflections Of An Immigration And Human Rights Clinician On The Past Four Years, Sarah H. Paoletti

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Deconstructing Invisible Walls: Sotomayor's Dissents In An Era Of Immigration Exceptionalism, Karla Mckanders

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Family In The Balance: Barton V. Barr And The Systematic Violation Of The Right To Family Life In U.S. Immigration Enforcement, David Baluarte

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

The United States systematically violates the international human right to family life in its system of removal of noncitizens. Cancellation of removal provides a means for noncitizens to challenge their removal based on family ties in the United States, but Congress has placed draconian limits on the discretion of immigration courts to cancel removal where noncitizens have committed certain crimes. The recently issued U.S. Supreme Court decision in Barton v. Barr illustrates the troubling trend of affording less discretion for immigration courts to balance family life in removal decisions that involve underlying criminal conduct. At issue was the “stop-time rule” …

The Continuing Legacy Of The National Origin Quotas, Angela M. Banks

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

The Authority Of International Refugee Law, Evan J. Criddle, Evan Fox-Decent

William & Mary Law Review

As COVID-19 has spread around the world, many states have suspended their compliance with a core requirement of international refugee law: the duty to refrain from returning refugees to territories where they face a serious risk of persecution (the duty of non-refoulement). These measures have prompted some observers to question whether non-refoulement will survive the pandemic as a nonderogable legal duty. This Article explains why the international community should embrace non-refoulement as a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) that applies even during public emergencies, such as the coronavirus pandemic. Viewed from a global justice perspective, the …

Arbitrary Arbiters: Evaluating The Right To Be Informed Of Eligibility For Discretionary Relief In Removal Proceedings, Michael Jordan

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The Forgotten Relatives In The Fight Against Family Separation: A Constitutional Analysis Of The Statutory Definition Of Unaccompanied Minors In Immigration Detention, Alysa Williams

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Is The "Hire American" Executive Order A Suspect Classification?, Michael H. Leroy

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

President Trump’s Executive Order 13,788 declares a “Hire American” policy for H-1B visas. This action discriminates against Indians to benefit white American workers. The technology workforce in the United States has 4.6 million jobs. Most employees in this large workforce—about 76%—are U.S.-born. In this domestic segment, 85% of employees are white. Among foreign-born workers (11.6% of all workers), Asians make up 66%, with Indians predominating.

“Hire American” renews a mostly forgotten history of discrimination against Indian workers. The Immigration Act of 1917 enacted an “Asiatic Barred Zone.” Indian immigration was curtailed to 100 annual arrivals. Typical of the period, the …

Pereira's Aftershocks, Lonny Hoffman

William & Mary Law Review

At the end of the 2017 term, the Supreme Court decided not to stop time. Nonpermanent residents who have been placed in removal proceedings may apply for a discretionary form of relief from the Attorney General known as “cancellation of removal.” To be eligible, an applicant must show (in addition to meeting other requirements) that she has been in the United States for at least ten consecutive years. The period of continuous physical presence is interrupted when the government serves the noncitizen with a notice to appear at a removal hearing. However, in Pereira v. Sessions, the Court held that …

Other Lands And Other Skies: Birthright Citizenship And Self-Government In Unincorporated Territories, John Vlahoplus

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Embracing The Chinese Exclusion Case: An International Law Approach To Racial Exclusions, Lauri Kai

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Even When You Win, You Lose: Executive Order 13769 & The Depressing State Of Procedural Due Process In The Context Of Immigration, Amy L. Moore

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Immigrant Covering, Stella Burch Elias

William & Mary Law Review

Over the last ten years there has been a marked shift in U.S. immigration law away from reliance upon statutory authorization and regulatory provisions to subregulatory or “liminal” rules and discretionary decision-making. This trend is apparent in both federal immigration law and in state and local rulemaking affecting immigrant communities. This Article proposes a new theoretical framework within which to analyze this phenomenon. It uses “covering,” a legal theory first developed in the context of employment discrimination and equal protection, as a lens through which to view these recent developments in immigration law and policy. It shows how immigration laws …

Where The American Dream Becomes A Nightmare: Lgbt Detainees In Immigration Detention Facilities, Lauren Zitsch

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Confronting Cops In Immigration Court, Mary Holper

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Part I of the Article outlines the police report problem by discussing the four situations in which police reports are used in immigration court, why police reports are unreliable, and the scope of the problem. Part II discusses criminal law’s treatment of police reports, focusing on the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment, which provides the constitutional justification for excluding police reports in criminal cases. Part III discusses the use of hearsay evidence in immigration cases, where hearsay is allowed due to the characterization of removal proceedings as civil, not criminal. While there has been a trend to reject unreliable …

Snap: How The Moral Elasticity Of The Denaturalization Statute Goes Too Far, Aram A. Gavoor, Daniel Miktus

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Comprehensive immigration reform is a popular topic in Congress. While many reform bills have been offered, none have addressed the significant substantive and procedural issues surrounding denaturalization, the process where the federal government may seek to have a naturalized person’s citizenship revoked in federal court if his citizenship was unlawfully or fraudulently procured.Though denaturalization serves public policy as a final check on naturalization fraud, existing law also permits the government to denaturalize an individual solely for speech and expressive association that occurs after one acquires citizenship. This provision, 8 U.S.C. § 1451(c), violates naturalized citizens’ First Amendment rights to free …

Mail Order Feminism, Marcia Zug

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

This Essay will argue that America’s current marriage crisis is a problem that could be solved by encouraging mail order marriages. Specifically, Part I of this Article will show how the current marriage crisis is the result of an increasing educational gap between American men and women that is leaving less educated men with few marriage prospects. It will further argue that the loss of marriage prospects is concerning both because marriage is often the social institution that supports men as their job prospects falter and because it has the potential to create an angry and dangerous underclass of men …