Law Commons^™

Factum Of The Charter Committee On Poverty Issues: In The Supreme Court Of Canada On Appeal From The Federal Court Of Appeal Between Mavis Baker, Appellant. And The Minister Of Citizenship And Immigration, Respondent., John Terry, Craig Scott

Commissioned Reports, Studies and Public Policy Documents

This appeal is about the validity of the decision of the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (the "Minister") to deny Mavis Baker's application for permanent residence on humanitarian and compassionate grounds and, in all likelihood, separate her from her children.

Temporary Protection: Towards A New Regional And Domestic Framework, Susan Martin, Andrew I. Schoenholtz, Deborah Waller Meyers

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

During the past thirty-five years, the United States has seen the direct influx of thousands of individuals leaving politically unstable countries. While some seeking entry have proved themselves to be refugees and obtained permanent protection in the United States, far more, including a large number of people fleeing civil war, natural disasters, or comparable forms of upheaval in their home countries, have failed to demonstrate that they would be targets of persecution. Yet, their return to their home countries has been complicated by the very circumstances that led to their flight: conflict, violence, and repression. Over time, the United States …

Passage Of Religious Freedom Act Necessary To Fulfill Maryland's National Leadership Role, Kenneth Lasson

All Faculty Scholarship

Three hundred sixty-four years ago this month, two tiny sailing ships arrived near what is now St. Mary's City with the first settlers in Maryland. The Ark and the Dove were sent to the New World by Cecil Calvert. Lord Baltimore had founded his small colony as a haven for those persecuted in England because of their religious beliefs.

On numerous occasions since then - from passage of the Act of Toleration in 1649 to the achievement of full civil liberties for Jews in 1825 to landmark Supreme Court decisions involving the state in the 1960s - Maryland has been …

Global Rights, Local Wrongs, And Legal Fixes: An International Human Rights Critique Of Immigration And Welfare "Reform", Berta E. Hernández-Truyol, Kimberly A. Johns

UF Law Faculty Publications

The United States enjoys a lofty reputation worldwide as the land of opportunity and dreams, the welcoming home to all who want to be free, the brave new world that embraces huddled masses and offers them limitless possibilities to find freedom, liberty, and happiness. In marked juxtaposition to this welcomeness narrative is the counter-narrative of historic exclusion evidenced by the harsh description of these "huddled masses, yearning to breathe free" as "wretched refuse." Indeed, to describe some immigrants as "wretched refuse" manifests that Lady Liberty's welcome is, at best, highly selective and, at worst, patently discriminatory. The irony, of course, …

Expanding The Circle Of Membership By Reconstructing The Alien: Lessons From Social Psychology And The Promise Enforcement Cases, Victor C. Romero

Journal Articles

Recent legal scholarship suggests that the Supreme Court's decisions on immigrants' rights favor conceptions of membership over personhood. Federal courts are often reluctant to recognize the personal rights claims of noncitizens because they are not members of the United States. Professor Michael Scaperlanda argues that because the courts have left the protection of noncitizens' rights in the hands of Congress and, therefore, its constituents, U.S. citizens must engage in a serious dialogue regarding membership in this polity while considering the importance of constitutional principles of personhood. This Article takes up Scaperlanda's challenge. Borrowing from recent research in social psychology, this …

Can International Refugee Law Be Made Relevant Again?, James C. Hathaway

Articles

Ironic though it may seem, I believe that the present breakdown in the authority of international refugee law is attributable to its failure explicitly to accommodate the reasonable preoccupations of governments in the countries to which refugees flee. International refugee law is part of a system of state self-regulation. It will therefore be respected only to the extent that receiving states believe that it fairly reconciles humanitarian objectives to their national interests. In contrast, refugee law arbitrarily assigns full legal responsibility for protection to whatever state asylum-seekers are able to reach. It is a peremptory regime. Apart from the right …

The ‘New World’ Of Judicial Review Of Removal Orders, Lenni B. Benson

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

The Summary Affirmance Proposal Of The Board Of Immigration Appeals, Philip G. Schrag

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Board of Immigration Appeals is on the verge of making a tragic mistake, trading away a key element of fair adjudication-the written opinion-for the sake of what it hopes will be greater administrative efficiency. The cost of eliminating written adjudication is too great, and the Board has given no indication that it has sufficiently canvassed less drastic alternatives.

The Board of Immigration Appeals (the "Board") is the primary appellate body for immigration law. The "staple" of its work is to decide appeals from decisions of Immigration Judges in removal proceedings, though it also hears appeals in several other categories, …

Skeptical Scrutiny Of Plenary Power: Judicial And Executive Branch Decision Making In Miller V Albright, Cornelia T. Pillard, T. Alexander Aleinikoff

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In 1996, just a few months after the United States successfully urged the Supreme Court in United States v. Virginia to invalidate as sex-discriminatory the male-only admissions policy at the Virginia Military Institute, the District of Columbia Circuit in Miller v. Albright upheld a federal law that used an express, sex-based distinction. Section 309(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) makes it harder for male U.S. citizens than for female citizens to convey their citizenship to their children if those children were born abroad out of wedlock and the other parent was not a U.S. citizen. Notwithstanding the United …

Ruminations On In Re Kasinga: The Decision's Legacy, Karen Musalo

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Expedited Removal: A Refugee's Perspective, Carol Buckler

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Migration As International Trade: The Economic Gains From The Liberalized Movement Of Labor, Howard F. Chang

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Who May Give Birth To Citizens? Reproduction, Eugenics, And Immigration, Dorothy E. Roberts

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

In Re Fauziya Kasinga: Brief For The Respondent, Karen Musalo

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Unaccompanied Children In I.N.S. Detention, Rosa Ehrenreich Brooks

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

It is important to note that children who end up in INS detention centers in the United States are not criminal detainees, but rather, administrative detainees. That is, they are not being held because they are accused or convicted of crimes. They are being held for two reasons only. First, the INS holds them in order to ensure their presence at immigration proceedings. They fear that if they let a child out, into foster care for instance, that child might not appear at any subsequent hearings or proceedings. Second, the government is legally required to look after these children in …

The Summary Affirmance Proposal Of The Board Of Immigration Appeals, Philip G. Schrag

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Board of Immigration Appeals is on the verge of making a tragic mistake, trading away a key element of fair adjudication--the written opinion--for the sake of what it hopes will be greater administrative efficiency. The cost of eliminating written adjudication is too great, and the Board has given no indication that it has sufficiently canvassed less drastic alternatives.

The Board of Immigration Appeals (the "Board") is the primary appellate body for immigration law. The "staple" of its work is to decide appeals from decisions of Immigration Judges in removal proceedings, though it also hears appeals in several other categories, …