Law Commons^™

Increase Quota, Invite Opportunities, Improve Economy: An Examination Of The Educational And Employment Crisis Of Undocumented Immigrants And Individuals From Abroad, Brittany Fink

Brittany Fink

No abstract provided.

Increase Quota, Invite Opportunities, Improve Economy: An Examination Of The Educational And Employment Crisis Of Undocumented Immigrants And Individuals From Abroad, Brittany Fink

Brittany Fink

No abstract provided.

“Branded To Drive: Obstacle Preemption Of North Carolina Driver’S Licenses For Daca Grantees”, Tung Sing Wong Mr.

Tung Sing Wong Mr.

The article focuses on whether driver’s licenses that North Carolina recently issued to Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) grantees are obstacle preempted. DACA grantees do not have legal status, but are protected from removal. North Carolina issued new driver’s licenses that publicize the immigration status of DACA grantees. The issue is whether a state can publish the immigration status of individuals who do not have legal status in the U.S., but are nonetheless protected from removal. Additionally, the article explores how the interaction of the North Carolina licenses with 287(g), Secured Communities, and recent state law such as Arizona's …

"Health Care For All:" The Gap Between Rhetoric And Reality In The Affordable Care Act, Vinita Andrapalliyal

Vinita Andrapalliyal

The rhetoric of “universal health care” and “health care for all” that pervaded the health care debate which culminated in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA)’s passage. However, the ACA offers reduced to no protections for certain noncitizen groups, specifically: 1) recently-arrived legal permanent residents, 2) nonimmigrants, and 3) the undocumented. This Article explores how the Act fails to ensure “health care for all,” demonstrates the gap between rhetoric and reality by parsing the ACA’s legislative history, and posits reasons for the gap. The ACA’s legislative history suggests that legislators’ biases towards these noncitizen groups, particularly with respect …

The Case For Mexican Asylum Seekers Fleeing Cartel Violence, Perry B. Nava

Perry B Nava

The number of Mexican immigrants filing for asylum in the United States is on the rise as cartel violence affects more people each year. The perceived increase in cartel-related, violent crime is displacing people similar to how a war forces displaced refugees out of a country; but the United States is not accepting a great majority of the applications for asylum. This paper explores the more broadly applicable law that protects persecuted people; some of the issues that have simultaneously contributed to increased migration to the United States and aggressive expansion by the drug cartels; the result of the application …

U.S. Asylum Law As A Path To Religious Persecution, Jack C. Dolance Ii

Jack C Dolance II

U.S. asylum law protects against persecution “on account of . . . religion.” But must the law protect a non-believer seeking religious asylum in the United States? Many may instinctively answer “no,” for a non-believer is by most definitions not “religious.” Such a response misses the mark however — at least in the context of U.S. asylum law, which is subject to the First Amendment. The protection of religious liberty enshrined in the First Amendment embodies freedom from persecution on account of one’s “religion” — in whatever form that religion may take. In the asylum context, then, “religion” must be …

Reclassifying "Terrorists" As Victims: Integrating Terrorism Analysis Into The Particular Social Group Framework Of Asylum, Emily Naser-Hall

Emily Naser-Hall

After the September 11th terrorist attacks at the hands of al-Qaeda operatives who slipped through the cracks of the US immigration system, immigration and asylum law became increasingly focused on ensuring that potential terrorists are not allowed into the United States. The USA PATRIOT Act and its subsequent legislation created what has become an unyielding bar to admission for any individual who is a member of a terrorist organization or who has committed terrorist activities. While the terrorism bar developed in response to real or perceived threats to US national security and has recently regained public light with the trial …

Revisiting The Meaning Of Marriage: Immigration For Same-Sex Spouses In A Post-Windsor World, Scott Titshaw

Scott Titshaw

When the Supreme Court struck down Section 3 of DOMA in United States v. Windsor, it eliminated a categorical barrier to immigration for thousands of LGBT families. Yet Windsor was not an immigration case, and the Court’s opinion did not address at least three resulting immigration questions: What if a same-sex couple legally marries in one jurisdiction but resides in a state that does not recognize the marriage? What if the couple is in a legally-recognized “civil union” or “registered partnership”? Will children born to spouses or registered partners in same-sex couples be recognized as “born in wedlock” for immigration …

Teaching The U.S. V. Arizona Immigration Law Case, Corey A. Ciocchetti

Corey A Ciocchetti

Arizona v. U.S. was one of the most anticipated decisions of the Supreme Court's October 2011 term. The case pits the state of Arizona and its immigration policy of "attrition through enforcement" against a much less aggressive federal immigration policy under President Obama.

These slides help tell the story and can be used to teach the case as well as important constitutional law issues such as: (1) enumerated powers, (2) preemption, (3) federalism, (4) state sovereignty and more.