Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 12 of 12

Full-Text Articles in Law

The Immigrant Struggle For Effective Counsel: An Empirical Assessment, Jayanth K. Krishnan Jan 2022

The Immigrant Struggle For Effective Counsel: An Empirical Assessment, Jayanth K. Krishnan

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Recently, in Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam, the Supreme Court upheld 8 U.S.C. § 1252(e)(2), a statutory provision placing restrictions on certain noncitizens from seeking habeas review in the federal judiciary. The Court focused on the Constitution’s Suspension Clause, but it also discussed the Due Process Clause, declaring that there was no violation there either.

One question which flows from this decision is whether the federal courts will soon be precluded from hearing other types of claims brought by noncitizens. Consider ineffective assistance of counsel petitions, which in the immigration law context are rooted in the Due Process Clause. …


The 'Impractical And Anomalous' Consequences Of Territorial Inequity, Jayanth K. Krishnan Jan 2022

The 'Impractical And Anomalous' Consequences Of Territorial Inequity, Jayanth K. Krishnan

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Located in the South Pacific Ocean, American Samoa is one of five populated “unincorporated territories” of the United States. It is unique, though, as those born there are not recognized as American citizens at birth and instead are deemed “noncitizen U.S. nationals.” They enjoy some, but not all, constitutional protections. Two federal appellate courts—the D.C. Circuit (in 2015) and the Tenth Circuit (in 2021)—have ruled that this classification does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause. Both courts have stated that it would be “impractical” and “anomalous” to extend birthright citizenship to the American Samoan community.

Drawing upon a powerful …


Facts Versus Discretion: The Debate Over Immigration Adjudication, Jayanth K. Krishnan Jan 2022

Facts Versus Discretion: The Debate Over Immigration Adjudication, Jayanth K. Krishnan

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Justice Amy Coney Barrett recently issued her first majority-led immigration opinion in Patel v. Garland (2022). As background, some immigrants looking to avoid deportation may apply for what is called “discretionary relief’ (e.g., asylum or adjustment of status) initially in an immigration court and then, if they lose, at the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). These immigration forums fall under the Department of Justice. Prior to Patel, immigrants who lost at the BIA could then ask a federal circuit court to review the factual findings of their case. Now, after Justice Barrett’s decision, Article III review is no longer available …


Judicial Power—Immigration-Style, Jayanth K. Krishnan Jan 2021

Judicial Power—Immigration-Style, Jayanth K. Krishnan

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Throughout this current global pandemic, but of course, even before, former President Trump advocated enacting restrictive immigration measures. Under his tenure, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) assumed enhanced judicial authority and issued decisions that often adversely affected noncitizens. However, in June 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down one of the DHS's most well-known initiatives, which sought to end the 'DACA' program. The Court held that the agency could not do so arbitrarily and had to comply with the requirements set forth in the Administrative Procedure Act.

Yet, there have been other areas where the DHS, particularly through its …


Theorizing The Immigrant Child: The Case Of Married Minors, Medha D. Makhlouf Jan 2017

Theorizing The Immigrant Child: The Case Of Married Minors, Medha D. Makhlouf

Faculty Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.


Judulang V. Holder And The Future Of 212(C) Relief, Patrick J. Glen Jan 2012

Judulang V. Holder And The Future Of 212(C) Relief, Patrick J. Glen

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

On December 12, 2011, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Judulang v. Holder, a case addressing the Board of Immigration Appeals’ use of the comparable grounds approach for determining eligibility for relief under former section 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The Court held that this approach was arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act, and remanded for the agency to determine a new way for determining the eligibility of deportable aliens for 212(c) relief. The purpose of this article is to place the Court’s decision in its proper historical context and to chart the …


Implicit Bias And Immigration Courts, Fatma Marouf Jan 2011

Implicit Bias And Immigration Courts, Fatma Marouf

Scholarly Works

This Article highlights the importance of implicit bias in immigration adjudication. After tracing the evolution of prejudice in our immigration laws from explicit "old-fashioned" prejudice to more subtle forms of "modem" and "aversive" prejudice, the Article argues that the specific conditions under which immigration judges decide cases render them especially prone to the influence of implicit bias. Specifically, it examines how factors such as immigration judges' lack of independence, limited opportunity for deliberate thinking, low motivation, and the low risk of judicial review all allow implicit bias to drive decisionmaking. The Article then recommends certain reforms, both simple and complex, …


Matter Of S-E-G-: The Final Nail In The Coffin For Gang-Related Asylum Claims?, Lindsay M. Harris, Morgan M. Weibel Jan 2010

Matter Of S-E-G-: The Final Nail In The Coffin For Gang-Related Asylum Claims?, Lindsay M. Harris, Morgan M. Weibel

Journal Articles

In July 2008, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA)1 affirmed an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of asylum to three young Salvadoran siblings fleeing gang violence and threats. This decision affects the likelihood that other youth and their family members fleeing gang violence will gain protection in the United States. The reach of the BIA decision in Matter of S-E-G-2 stretches far beyond the facts of the actual case or gang cases in general and may shape the future of asylum based on membership in a particular social group. The BIA published Matter of S-E-G- as one of only 36 precedent …


"Streamlining" The Rule Of Law: How The Department Of Justice Is Undermining Judicial Review Of Agency Action, Shruti Rana Jan 2009

"Streamlining" The Rule Of Law: How The Department Of Justice Is Undermining Judicial Review Of Agency Action, Shruti Rana

Faculty Scholarship

Judicial review of administrative decision making is an essential institutional check on agency power. Recently, however, the Department of Justice dramatically revised its regulations in an attempt to insulate its decision making from public and federal court scrutiny. These “streamlining” rules, carried out in the name of national security and immigration reform, have led to a breakdown in the rule of law in our judicial system. While much attention has been focused on the Department of Justice’s recent attempts to shield executive power from the reach of Congress, its efforts to undermine judicial review have so far escaped such scrutiny. …


Incorporating A 'Best Interests Of The Child' Approach Into Immigration Law And Procedure, Bridgette A. Carr Jan 2009

Incorporating A 'Best Interests Of The Child' Approach Into Immigration Law And Procedure, Bridgette A. Carr

Articles

United States immigration law and procedure frequently ignore the plight of children directly affected by immigration proceedings. This ignorance means decision-makers often lack the discretion to protect a child from persecution by halting the deportation of a parent, while parents must choose between abandoning their children in a foreign land and risking the torture of their children. United States immigration law systematically fails to consider the best interests of children directly affected by immigration proceedings. This failure has resulted in a split among the federal circuit courts of appeals regarding whether the persecution a child faces may be used to …


Refugee Roulette: Disparities In Asylum Adjudication, Andrew I. Schoenholtz, Jaya Ramji-Nogales, Philip G. Schrag Jan 2007

Refugee Roulette: Disparities In Asylum Adjudication, Andrew I. Schoenholtz, Jaya Ramji-Nogales, Philip G. Schrag

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This study analyzes databases of merits decisions from all four levels of the asylum adjudication process: 133,000 decisions by 884 asylum officers over a seven year period; 140,000 decisions of 225 immigration judges over a four-and-a-half year period; 126,000 decisions of the Board of Immigration Appeals over six years; and 4215 decisions of the U.S. Courts of Appeal during 2004 and 2005. The analysis reveals significant disparities in grant rates, even when different adjudicators in the same office each considered large numbers of applications from nationals of the same country. In many cases, the most important moment in an asylum …


Why Are So Many People Challenging Board Of Immigration Appeals Decisions In Federal Court? An Empirical Analysis Of The Recent Surge In Petitions For Review, John R.B. Palmer, Stephen W. Yale-Loehr, Elizabeth Cronin Oct 2005

Why Are So Many People Challenging Board Of Immigration Appeals Decisions In Federal Court? An Empirical Analysis Of The Recent Surge In Petitions For Review, John R.B. Palmer, Stephen W. Yale-Loehr, Elizabeth Cronin

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.