Law Commons^™

United States V. Lopez-Velasquez: What Is A "Reasonable Possibility" Of Apparent Eligibility For Relief From Deportation?, Kristina M. Seil

Golden Gate University Law Review

Modern deportation procedure is circumscribed by regulations intended to guarantee fairness and uniformity. Federal regulations thus mandate that immigration judges inform noncitizens of their eligibility for relief from deportation in an effort to ensure that unrepresented respondents in immigration proceedings make informed decisions.

Unhappily, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has recently limited this regulation-mandated duty to inform. In United States v. Lopez-Velasquez, the Ninth Circuit held that the duty to inform is not triggered when sources outside the Ninth Circuit indicate that relief may be possible because the relevant Ninth Circuit precedent is no longer …

Rodriguez V. Hayes: Government Accountability For Immigrants In Prolonged Detention, Otis Carl Landerholm

Golden Gate University Law Review

United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) chooses to keep many immigrants incarcerated while they await the results of their hearings before immigration judges, appeals to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), or second appeals to the federal courts of appeals. Starting with Zadvydas v. Davis in 2001, federal courts have been facing the question of whether such lengthy detentions are permissible under either the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) or the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court in Zadvydas held that indefinite detention “would raise serious constitutional concerns” and decided to construe the prolonged-detention statute at issue “to contain …