Law Commons^™

“Help Is Here”: How A Daca Pathway To Citizenship Will Help Save The Social Security Fund, Jissel Esparza

Arkansas Law Review

Two federal programs hold their beneficiaries in limbo: DACA and Social Security. This Comment demonstrates that creating a citizenship pathway for the DACA population will not only give these deserving individuals the ability and security to remain in the United States but will also provide relief to Social Security’s impending insolvency through the influx of taxes that these then citizens will contribute as a result of increased opportunities. At the same time, this Comment does not attempt to portray its argument as a “silver bullet.” Rather, this approach is one tool that can be utilized by legislative efforts to remedy …

Heirs Of An Administration: Unlawful Executive Actions, Jerome Perez

Catholic University Law Review

The Supreme Court of the United States in DHS v. Regents on June 18, 2020, decided to stall the Trump administration from rescinding the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) policy that the Obama administration created contrary to the Administrative Procedures Act (APA)––even though in 2016 the Supreme Court affirmed a preliminary injunction on the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA) policy, which mirrors DACA. This blunder offhandedly sacrifices the Supreme Court’s reputation as nonpartisan by enlisting itself as the future arbiter of administrative issues with self-evident resolutions and deciding contrary to those resolutions to endorse a political agenda. …

Undocuamerica Monologues, Motus Theater, Alejandro Fuentes Mena, Armando Peniche, Christian Solano-Córdova, Kirsten Wilson

University of Colorado Law Review

The following work contains three monologues from Motus Theater's UndocuAmerica Project, which aims to interrupt dehumanizing portrayals of immigrants by encouraging thoughtful engagement on the challenges faced by undocumented communities and the assets immigrants bring to our country. The monologues were created in a collaboration between leaders with DACA status and Motus Theater Artistic Director Kirsten Wilson during a seventeen-week autobiographical- monologue workshop. All three pieces were presented in a virtual performance on April 8, 2021, as an introduction to the 29th Annual Rothgerber Conference.

Requiring The Executive To Turn Square Corners: The Supreme Court Increases Agency Accountability In Department Of Homeland Security V. Regents Of The University Of California, Claudia J. Bernstein

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Administrative agencies frequently promulgate rules that have dramatic effects on peoples’ lives. Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (“DACA”) is one such example. DACA grants certain unlawful immigrants a temporary reprieve from deportation, as well as ancillary benefits such as work permits. In 2017, the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) sought to rescind DACA on the basis that the program violates the Immigration and Nationality Act.

This Comment analyzes the recent Supreme Court decision about DACA’s recission in Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of University of California. In rejecting DHS’s attempt to rescind DACA, the Court strengthened agency accountability …

Preventing A Permanent Underclass: Why In-State Tuition For Daca Students Just Makes Sense, Christian Bowcutt, Eliza Allen

Brigham Young University Prelaw Review

In the landmark 1982 Supreme Court Case "Plyler v. Doe", the right to a free education was guaranteed to undocumented students. One of the reasons for this was to "prevent a permanent underclass". Today, we have a similar opportunity to lift our fellow peers by passing legislation to guarantee in-state tuition to DACA recipients. DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) is a program that grants temporary citizenship to qualifying children and youth who are brought to the United States with their parent(s) or guardian(s). Currently, the majority of states have not guaranteed this right to DACA students. With tuition rates …

An Appellate Solution To Nationwide Injunctions, Sam Heavenrich

Indiana Law Journal

District courts have issued an unprecedented number of nationwide injunctions during the Obama and Trump administrations, provoking criticism from the Supreme Court. This Article proposes a change to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that addresses the Justices’ concerns without taking the drastic step of eliminating nationwide injunctions entirely. Specifically, this Article recommends amending Rule 65 to allow only the appellate courts to issue injunctive relief that extends beyond the plaintiffs in cases challenging a federal law or policy. In addition to the proposed Rule change, this Article offers a categorization framework for existing proposals addressing nationwide injunctions, classifying them …

The Substantial Impact Approach: Reviewing Policy Statements In Light Of Apa Finality, Emily Parsons

Washington Law Review

Federal agencies engage in a wide range of non-binding action, issuing guidance documents such as policy statements and interpretive rules. Although these guidance documents may have a substantial impact on industries or members of the public, courts often refuse to review their substance. The Administrative Procedure Act requires agency action to be “final” before courts can review it. The D.C. Circuit and the Ninth Circuit have taken conflicting and often messy approaches in determining whether interpretive rules and policy statements are final and thus reviewable. This Comment proposes a new approach: the substantial impact approach. Under this approach—repurposed from a …

Immigration Policy: A Look At Its History And Its Future, Melisa Fumbarg

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

This comment will examine immigration in the United States, specifically by addressing questions involving the constitutionality of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and removal procedures. Part II will look at the historical background of immigration policy in the United States, including past amnesties and the latest reform, DACA. Part III will analyze DACA and why it was rescinded. Part IV will discuss one the most detrimental consequences of DACA being rescinded—deportation, and the constitutional limits of removal procedures. Part V will deploy some future predictions on immigration and the next steps Congress should take to ensure that there is …

Separate But (Un)Equal: Why Institutionalized Anti-Racism Is The Answer To The Never-Ending Cycle Of Plessy V. Ferguson, Maureen Johnson

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Bold Executive Action And False Equivalence, Stephen H. Legomsky

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Evading Constitutional Challenge: Dapa's Implications For Future Exercises Of Executive Enforcement Discretion, Lucy Chauvin

Indiana Law Journal

I. UNITED STATES V. TEXAS: DEFINING THE BOUNDARIES OF ENFORCEMENT DISCRETION

A. DAPA AND THE CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE

B. SCHOLARLY DEBATE: APPLICATION OF YOUNGSTOWN FRAMEWORK TO DAPA

II. TAKE CARE: CONFLICTING INTERPRETATIONS OF THE DUTY TO FAITHFULLY EXECUTE THE LAW

III. ENFORCEMENT DISCRETION: INTERACTION BETWEEN CONGRESS AND THE EXECUTIVE

A. HECKLER V. CHANEY: EARLY RECOGNITION OF EXECUTIVE ENFORCEMENT DISCRETION

B. ENFORCEMENT DISCRETION’S SPECIFIC APPLICATION TO IMMIGRATION LAW

C. THE MEANING OF “DEFERRED ACTION”

IV. THE HISTORICALLY LIMITED ROLE OF THE JUDICIARY

A. PRESUMPTIVE UNREVIEWABILITY

B. ADDITIONAL PROCEDURAL HURDLES

V. MOVING FORWARD: LESSONS TO BE LEARNED FROM THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION

A. FRAMING …

The Crushing Of A Dream: Daca, Dapa And The Politics Of Immigration Law Under President Obama, Robert H. Wood

Barry Law Review

No abstract provided.

Presidential Legitimacy Through The Anti-Discrimination Lens, Catherine Y. Kim

Chicago-Kent Law Review

The Obama administration’s deferred action programs granting temporary relief from deportation to undocumented immigrants have focused attention to questions regarding the legitimacy of presidential lawmaking. Immigration, though, is not the only context in which the president has exercised policymaking authority. This essay examines parallel instances of executive lawmaking in the anti-discrimination area. Presidential policies relating to workplace discrimination, environmental justice, and affirmative action share some of the key features troubling critics of deferred action yet have been spared from serious constitutional challenge. These examples underscore the unique challenges to assessing the validity of actions targeting traditionally disenfranchised groups—be they noncitizens, …

Binding The Enforcers: The Administrative Law Struggle Behind President Obama's Immigration Actions, Michael Kagan

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Struggle To Rise Above The Shadows Before Sunset: A Critical Discussion On The Need To Lift The Expiration And Renewal Requirements Of Daca And Dapa, Anna Oguntimein

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

Reasoning that judicial economy is best served when a law enforcement agency determines how to expend its limited enforcemen tresources, the Supreme Court has held that the decision to exercise prosecutorial discretion is presumptively unreviewable.1 In the realm of immigration law, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and the recently announced Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) promote the goal of judicial economy by imposing a freeze on the deportation of eligible noncitizens who either entered the United States as children or who have a child who is a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident …

Executive Action On Immigration: Constitutional Or Direct Conflict?, Todd Curtin

Florida A & M University Law Review

On November 20, 2014, the White House released a press statement notifying viewers that President Obama would do everything within his executive powers to solve the problems surrounding the immigration system. The White House made it clear that the President would be acting with legal authority in taking these steps. This paper addresses whether or not the Obama Administration did, in fact, act with legal authority by initiating the following steps using his executive authority: “cracking down on illegal immigration at the border; deporting felons, not families; and accountability through criminal background checks and taxes.” President Obama, acting through Secretary …

Achieving The Dream: Extending Immigration Reform To Administrative Case Closure, Tory E. Smith

San Diego Law Review

This Comment compares DACA to administrative case closure and argues that Congress or the President should grant employment authorization to individuals whose cases have been administratively closed. Part I describes the current interpretation of the employment authorization regulation and provides the background of administrative case closure. Part I highlights the disparate treatment that the regulation affords to undocumented immigrants facing deferred action and administrative closure—offering employment authorization to only deferred action recipients. Part II examines the history of deferred action in immigration cases and uses DACA as a framework to show how the scope of the employment authorization regulation should …

Obama's Ruby Slippers: Enforcement Discretion In The Absence Of Immigration Reform, Lauren Gilbert

West Virginia Law Review

This Article explores how Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) emerged both from thwarted efforts at immigration reform and the Supreme Court's highly anticipated decision in Arizona v. UnitedStates.' I ar- gue that DACA not only was adopted in response to repeated failed efforts to pass the DREAM Act; it was also promulgated in anticipation of a possible fa- vorable ruling by the Court on S.B. 1070. In Part I, I examine the current sepa- ration of powers crisis in immigration policy. I look at both the context in which DACA was adopted and at challenges to DACA in Court …