Law Commons^™

The Best Interests Of The Child Or The State? The Rights Of The Child In Non-Lpr Cancellation Of Removal, Lizzie Bird

Master's Theses

This thesis argues that the United States is failing to fulfill its obligations under the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) in its adjudication of the hardship standard in non-LPR cancellation of removal. It is well-documented that the current interpretation of the “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” standard results in the separation of families and de facto deportation of children, many of whom are U.S. citizens. This thesis contends that this practice is not only unjust, but also unlawful.

First, it argues that the CRC in general and Article 3 (the “best interests” principle) in particular have risen …

Expedited Removal And Due Process: “A Testing Crucible Of Basic Principle” In The Time Of Trump, Daniel Kanstroom

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

National Security, Immigration And The Muslim Bans, Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Categorical Approach Or Categorical Chaos - A Critical Analysis Of The Inconsistencies In Determining Whether Felony Dwi Is A Crime Of Violence For Purposes Of Deportation Under 18 U.S.C. 16, Timothy M. Mulvaney

Timothy M. Mulvaney

No abstract provided.

Death By Fifty Cuts: Exporting Lunn V. Commonwealth To Maine And The Prospects For Waging A Frontal Assault On The Ice Detainer System In State Courts, Sean Turley

Maine Law Review

As long as the future of federal immigration policy remains unsettled and the use of ICE detainers to capture and deport suspected noncitizens remains widespread, practitioners should focus their attention on waging a frontal assault against the legality of ICE detainers on state law grounds by arguing that they constitute warrantless arrests that are prohibited by state statute. The recent Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision in Lunn v. Commonwealth provides a model for how to wage such an attack—not only in states with similar common law and statutory frameworks that are unlikely to resolve the issue legislatively, like Maine, but …

A Particularly Serious Exception To The Categorical Approach, Fatma E. Marouf

Fatma Marouf

A noncitizen who has been convicted of a “particularly serious crime” can be deported to a country where there is a greater than fifty percent chance of persecution or death. Yet, the Board of Immigration Appeals has not provided a clear test for determining what is a “particularly serious crime.” The current test, which combines an examination of the elements with a fact-specific inquiry, has led to arbitrary and unpredictable decisions about what types of offenses are “particularly serious.” This Article argues that the categorical approach for analyzing convictions should be applied to the particularly serious crime determination to promote …

A Rising Star: Maria Viveiros, Rwu Class Of 2017 (May 2018), Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Protecting Children? Assessing The Treatment Of Unaccompanied Minors In The U.S., Chiara Galli

Latino Public Policy

In the summer of 2014, unprecedented numbers of unaccompanied minors fleeing violence in El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras arrived in the U.S. seeking refuge. Current U.S. immigration law affords certain legal protections to children who migrate alone from non-contiguous countries, allowing them to be initially admitted to the U.S. To avoid deportation and remain in the country long-term, however, they must successfully apply for humanitarian relief from deportation. This interview-based study traces these children’s experiences navigating this legal process and interacting with different branches of the US immigration bureaucracy.

Getting It Righted: Access To Counsel In Rapid Removals, Stephen Manning, Kari Hong

Marquette Law Review

None

Newsroom: Fund Lawyers To Fight For The Poor 1-26-2018, Luis Mancheno, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Chevron's Liberty Exception, Michael Kagan

Scholarly Works

This Article argues that the Supreme Court’s practice in immigration cases reflects an unstated but compelling limitation on Chevron deference. Judicial deference to the executive branch is inappropriate when courts review the legality of a government intrusion on physical liberty. This norm is illustrated by the fact that the Court has not meaningfully applied Chevron deference in cases concerning deportation, and also has seemed reluctant to do so in cases concerning immigration detention. It is a logical extension of the established rule that Chevron deference does not apply to questions of criminal law. By contrast, the Court applies Chevron deference …

Crimmigration In Gangland: Race, Crime, And Removal During The Prohibition Era, Geoffrey Heeren

Articles

In 1926, local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities in Chicago pursued a deportation drive ostensibly directed at gang members. However, the operation largely took the form of indiscriminate raids on immigrant neighborhoods of the city. Crimmigration in Gangland describes the largely forgotten 1926 deportation drive in Chicago as a means to augment the origin story for "crimmigration." Scholars up until now have mostly contended that the convergence of criminal and immigration law occurred in the 1980s as part of the War on Drugs, with crime serving as a proxy for race for policy makers unable to openly argue for …

Judicial Review Of Disproportionate (Or Retaliatory) Deportation, Jason A. Cade

Scholarly Works

This Article focuses attention on two recent and notable federal court opinions considering challenges to Trump administration deportation decisions. While finding no statutory bar to the noncitizens’ detention and deportation in these cases, the court in each instance paused to highlight the injustice of the removal decisions. This Article places the opinions in the context of emerging immigration enforcement trends, which reflect a growing indifference to disproportionate treatment as well as enforcement actions founded on retaliation for the exercise of constitutional rights. Judicial decisions like the ones considered here serve vital functions in the cause of immigration law reform even …

Toward Universal Deportation Defense: An Optimistic View, Michael Kagan

Scholarly Works

One of the most positive responses to heightened federal enforcement of immigration laws has been increasing local and philanthropic interest in supporting immigrant legal defense. These measures are tentative and may be fleeting, and for the time being are not a substitute for federal support for an immigration public defender system. Nevertheless, it is now possible to envision many more immigrants in deportation having access to counsel, maybe even a situation in which the majority do. In this paper, Professor Michael Kagan makes no real predictions. Instead, he offers a deliberately-perhaps even blindly optimistic assessment of how concrete steps that …

Undocumented Citizens Of The United States: The Repercussions Of Denying Birth Certificates, Anna L. Lichtenberger

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming

Finality Of A Conviction: A Noncitizen's Right To Procedural Due Process, Daniela Mondragon

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming