Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Asylum (5)
- Refugee Convention (5)
- Colloquium on Challenges in International Refugee Law (3)
- Law reform (3)
- Michigan Guidelines on Risk for Reasons of Political Opinion (3)
-
- Political opinion (3)
- Refugees (3)
- Federalism (2)
- United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (2)
- University of Michigan (2)
- Abdisalan v. Holder (1)
- Administrative Procedure Act (1)
- Aliens (1)
- Arizona v. United States (1)
- Asylum seekers (1)
- Background checks (1)
- Black-Box Immigration Federalism (1)
- Board of Immigration Appeals (1)
- Border Security Economic Opportunity and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013 (1)
- Borders (1)
- Canada (1)
- Caregivers (1)
- Children (1)
- Common but differentiated responsibility (1)
- Cooperation (1)
- Courts of appeals (1)
- Dauvergne (Catherine) (1)
- Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (1)
- Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (1)
- Displaced persons (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 11 of 11
Full-Text Articles in Law
Should We Presume State Protection?, James C. Hathaway, Audrey Macklin
Should We Presume State Protection?, James C. Hathaway, Audrey Macklin
Articles
Professors Hathaway and Macklin debate the legality of the “presumption of state protection” that the Supreme Court of Canada established as a matter of Canadian refugee law in the Ward decision. Professor Hathaway argues that this presumption should be rejected because it lacks a sound empirical basis and because it conflicts with the relatively low evidentiary threshold set by the Refugee Convention’s “well-founded fear” standard. Professor Macklin contends that the Ward presumption does not in and of itself impose an unduly onerous burden on claimants, and that much of the damage wrought by the presumption comes instead from misinterpretation and …
Pushing An End To Sanctuary Cities: Will It Happen?, Raina Bhatt
Pushing An End To Sanctuary Cities: Will It Happen?, Raina Bhatt
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
Sanctuary jurisdictions refer to city, town, and state governments (collectively, localities or local governments) that have passed provisions to limit their enforcement of federal immigration laws. Such local governments execute limiting provisions in order to bolster community cooperation, prevent racial discrimination, focus on local priorities for enforcement, or even to a show a local policy that differs from federal policy. The provisions are in the forms of executive orders, municipal ordinances, and state resolutions. Additionally, the scope of the provisions vary by locality: some prohibit law enforcement from asking about immigration status, while others prohibit the use of state resources …
A Global Solution To A Global Refugee Crisis, James C. Hathaway
A Global Solution To A Global Refugee Crisis, James C. Hathaway
Articles
The author argues that the time is right to change the way that refugee law is implemented. Specifically, Hathaway advocates a shift towards a managed and collectivized approach to the implementation of refugee protection obligations. He contends that while the obligations under the Convention remain sound, the mechanisms for implementing those obligations are flawed in ways that too often lead States to act against their own values and interests, and which produce needless suffering amongst refugees. The author concludes with a five-point plan to revitalize the Refugee Convention.
Productivity And Affinity In The Age Of Dignity, Stephen Lee
Productivity And Affinity In The Age Of Dignity, Stephen Lee
Michigan Law Review
This Review proceeds as follows. Part I summarizes The Age of Dignity. Part II explains how this segment of immigrant workers challenges the productivity/affinity binary that dominates immigration law’s formal migration rules. Part III shows how this binary sets up dual migration streams, both of which could account for future flows of care workers. As Part III shows, the example of the eldercare industry nicely illustrates how the employment based and family-based migration systems simply represent two different ways of filling labor needs. I then conclude.
Finality And Judicial Review Under The Immigration And Nationality Act: A Jurisprudential Review And Proposal For Reform, Jesi J. Carlson, Patrick J. Glen, Kohsei Ugumori
Finality And Judicial Review Under The Immigration And Nationality Act: A Jurisprudential Review And Proposal For Reform, Jesi J. Carlson, Patrick J. Glen, Kohsei Ugumori
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
Under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), aliens may petition for judicial review of an adverse decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) as long as that decision constitutes a “final order of removal.” Usually it is not difficult to ascertain when an alien should file her petition: the thirty-day statutory filing deadline begins to run when the Board issues a decision that affirms the immigration judge’s removal order in its entirety. In some cases, however, an alien seeks multiple forms of relief from removal in a single proceeding. When that occurs, some forms of relief might be granted, …
Left Behind: The Dying Principle Of Family Reunification Under Immigration Law, Anita Ortiz Maddali
Left Behind: The Dying Principle Of Family Reunification Under Immigration Law, Anita Ortiz Maddali
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
A key underpinning of modern U.S. immigration law is family reunification, but in practice it can privilege certain families and certain members within families. Drawing on legislative history, this Article examines the origins and objectives of the principle of family reunification in immigration law and relies on legal scholarship and sociological and anthropological research to reveal how contemporary immigration law and policy has diluted the principle for many families—particularly those who do not fit the dominant nuclear family model, those classified as unskilled, and families from oversubscribed countries—and members within families. It explores the ways in which women and children, …
Special Feature Seventh Colloquium On Challenges In International Refugee Law, James C. Hathaway
Special Feature Seventh Colloquium On Challenges In International Refugee Law, James C. Hathaway
Michigan Journal of International Law
Refugee status at international law requires more than demonstration of a risk of being persecuted. Unless the risk faced by an applicant is causally connected to one of five specified attributes – his or her race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion – the claim to be a refugee must fail. Because the drafters of the Refugee Convention believed that the world’s asylum capacity was insufficient to accommodate all those at risk of being persecuted, they opted to confine the class of refugees to persons whose predicament stems from who they are, or what they …
Refugees Without Borders: Legal Implications Of The Refugee Crisis In The Schengen Zone, Bridget Carr
Refugees Without Borders: Legal Implications Of The Refugee Crisis In The Schengen Zone, Bridget Carr
Michigan Journal of International Law
This Note will first examine current practices utilized by Member States and their strategic partners outside the Zone to manage flows of third-country nationals from the Middle East and North Africa. It will then explore how these practices are not compatible with principles of protection from degrading and inhuman treatment, non-refoulement, and non-discrimination as codified in the Schengen Borders Code, European Convention on Human Rights, and the Refugee Convention, among others. Finally, this Note will propose targeted reforms for the Schengen Zone’s internal and external border management aimed at protecting the human rights of displaced persons and modifying incentive structures …
The Michigan Guidelines On Risk For Reasons Of Political Opinion
The Michigan Guidelines On Risk For Reasons Of Political Opinion
Michigan Journal of International Law
The Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (“Convention”) recognizes as refugees those who, owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted on the basis of inter alia “political opinion,” are unable or unwilling to avail themselves of the protection of their home country
Toward A New Framework For Understanding Political Opinion, Catherine Dauvergne
Toward A New Framework For Understanding Political Opinion, Catherine Dauvergne
Michigan Journal of International Law
This paper was written to frame the work of the Seventh Colloquium on Challenges in International Refugee Law, held at the University of Michigan Faculty of Law, on March 27–29, 2015. To some extent, therefore, it has already served its purpose. It is somewhat tempting in the wake of the Colloquium to completely reconstruct the paper in light of the conversations and conclusions of that event. Such reconstruction, however, would be misleading. Instead, I have chosen to publish the paper in a form that is very similar to its earlier iteration, with a few corrections, clarifications, and explanatory notes about …
Black-Box Immigration Federalism, David S. Rubenstein
Black-Box Immigration Federalism, David S. Rubenstein
Michigan Law Review
In Immigration Outside the Law, Hiroshi Motomura confronts the three hardest questions in immigration today: what to do about our undocumented population, who should decide, and by what legal process. Motomura’s treatment is characteristically visionary, analytically rich, and eminently fair to competing views. The book’s intellectual arc begins with its title: “Immigration Outside the Law.” As the narrative unfolds, however, Motomura explains that undocumented immigrants are “Americans in waiting,” with moral and legal claims to societal integration.