Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Law
Undocumented Citizens Of The United States: The Repercussions Of Denying Birth Certificates, Anna L. Lichtenberger
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
Finality Of A Conviction: A Noncitizen's Right To Procedural Due Process, Daniela Mondragon
St. Mary's Law Journal
Abstract forthcoming
Driving Down The Wrong Road: The Fifth Circuit's Definition Of Unauthorized Use Of A Motor Vehicle As A Crime Of Violence In The Immigration Context., Heather Harrison Volik
Driving Down The Wrong Road: The Fifth Circuit's Definition Of Unauthorized Use Of A Motor Vehicle As A Crime Of Violence In The Immigration Context., Heather Harrison Volik
St. Mary's Law Journal
Individuals who are not United States citizens and participate in violent or severe criminal activity are likely to be deported and become inadmissible for life. But noncitizens can also be deported for minor criminal activity which does not cause harm or serious damage. In such cases, deportation is an extreme punishment out of proportion to the offense. Unauthorized use of a motor vehicle (UUMV) is an example of a crime which can be committed without serious harm or damage. The Fifth Circuit regularly sustains decisions of lifetime reentry ban for noncitizens convicted of UUMV. Under immigration law, “aliens” who are …
The Effect Of 8 U. S. C. 1324(D) In Transporting Prosecutions: Does The Confrontation Clause Still Apply To Alien Defendants., Donna F. Coltharp
The Effect Of 8 U. S. C. 1324(D) In Transporting Prosecutions: Does The Confrontation Clause Still Apply To Alien Defendants., Donna F. Coltharp
St. Mary's Law Journal
Cases prosecuted under 8 U.S.C. §1324 present special challenges for the Government and for defendants. Under §1324, it is a crime to transport or smuggle aliens into the United States. Prosecuting transporters or smugglers may present a challenge if a witness is unavailable. Even though transporting or smuggling always has witnesses—the alien(s) who hired the smuggler or transporter—not all witnesses have prolonged detentions, and some are returned to their native country. The transporter or smuggler may then assert their Sixth Amendment right. The Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause requires that in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to …
A Tortured Construction: The Illegal Immigration Reform And Immigrant Responsibility Act's Express Bar Denying Criminal Aliens Withholding Of Deportation Defies The Principles Of International Law Comment., Bobbie Marie Guerra
St. Mary's Law Journal
The United States has never fully complied with international agreements concerning refugee’s rights to not be returned to a country where he or she faces certain threats of torture. This lack of compliance by the United States is exacerbated by two conflicting interests: the growing insistence on keeping aliens outside the nation’s borders and protecting international refugees who endure gross violations of their human rights. The recent amendments to the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) provide a contemporary example of the volatility and inconsistency of the United States’ immigration policy. In April 1996, Congress enacted the Antiterrorism and Effective Death …
The Antiterrorism Act, The Immigration Reform Act, And Ideological Regulation In The Immigration Laws: Important Lessons For Citizens And Noncitizens., Kevin R. Johnson
The Antiterrorism Act, The Immigration Reform Act, And Ideological Regulation In The Immigration Laws: Important Lessons For Citizens And Noncitizens., Kevin R. Johnson
St. Mary's Law Journal
This Article analyzes how the Antiterrorism Act and the Immigration Reform Act reflect a larger historical dynamic in the relationship between domestic subordination and immigration law. The U.S. government historically employed immigration laws in an effort to protect the established political and social order. History reveals a strong correlation between the severe treatment politically subversive U.S. citizens received and the constriction of the immigration laws. This Article argues the lack of constitutional protections for noncitizens helps to explain the recurrent backlash against them. The treatment of noncitizens suggests how far the government might go to suppress domestic political dissent by …
Distinguishing Fong Yue Ting: Why The Inclusion Of Perjury As An Aggravated Felony Subjecting Legal Aliens To Deportation Under The Antiterrorism And Effective Death Penalty Act Violates The Eighth Amendment Comment., Gregory L. Ryan
St. Mary's Law Journal
Responding to the terrorist bombing in Oklahoma City, Congress spent several months researching and discussing the best ways to strengthen the United States’ ability to deter and punish terrorism. In 1996, Congress sent a bill to the President designed to make the country safer, and President Clinton signed the bill into law: The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA). The AEDPA mandates a foreign national convicted of perjury be deported. Tucked away in the middle of the AEDPA, strict sanctions are imposed on noncitizens who commit perjury or subordination of perjury. In an attempt to strengthen the …
In Re Oluloro: Risk Of Female Genital Mutilation As Extreme Hardship In Immigration Proceedings Symposium - Human Rights In The Americas - Recent Development., Patricia Dysart Rudloff
In Re Oluloro: Risk Of Female Genital Mutilation As Extreme Hardship In Immigration Proceedings Symposium - Human Rights In The Americas - Recent Development., Patricia Dysart Rudloff
St. Mary's Law Journal
On March 23, 1994, in In re Oluloro, Immigration Judge Kendall Warren’s decision indicated the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) should consider human rights abuses directed at women. The overriding concern was the possibility that two young U.S. girls would suffer female genital mutilation (FGM) if the INS deported their mother to Nigeria. In reaching the decision to suspend the mother’s deportation, Judge Warren condemned FGM as “cruel and serv[ing] no known medical purpose.” Judge Warren ruled the practice presented an extreme hardship for the girls. Unfortunately, the court’s ruling has no precedential value because the INS did …