Law Commons^™

All Americans Not Equal: Mistrust And Discrimination Against Naturalized Citizens In The U.S., Alev Dudek

Alev Dudek

Deferred Action, Supervised Enforcement Discretion, And The Rule Of Law Basis For Executive Action On Immigration, Anil Kalhan

Anil Kalhan

In November 2014, the Obama administration announced the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) initiative, which built upon a program instituted two years earlier, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) initiative. As mechanisms to channel the government’s scarce resources toward its enforcement priorities more efficiently and effectively, both DACA and DAPA permit certain individuals falling outside those priorities to seek “deferred action,” which provides its recipients with time-limited, nonbinding, and revocable notification that officials have exercised prosecutorial discretion to deprioritize their removal. While deferred action thereby facilitates a highly tenuous form of quasi-legal recognition …

Did Multicultural America Result From A Mistake? The 1965 Immigration Act And Evidence From Roll Call Votes, Gabriel Chin, Doug Spencer

Douglas M. Spencer

Between July 1964 and October 1965, Congress enacted the three most important civil rights laws since Reconstruction: The Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and the Immigration and Nationality Act Amendments of 1965. As we approach the 50th anniversary of these laws, it is clear that all three have fundamentally remade the United States; education, employment, housing, politics, and the population itself have irreversibly changed.

Arguably the least celebrated yet most consequential of these laws was the 1965 Immigration Act, which set the United States on the path to become a “majority minority” nation. In …

Devolution And Discrimination, Victor C. Romero

Victor C. Romero

This essay explores the issue of whether discrimination against two historically disadvantaged groups - racial minorities, on the one hand, and gays and lesbians, on the other - might increase or decrease should the federal immigration power devolve to the individual states. I conclude that while the lack of uniformity that accompanies immigration law devolution might lead to undesirable results in welfare reform and criminal law enforcement, and would likely not stem the tide of racism, it might lead to the opening of opportunities for gay Americans to petition their binational partners for immigration benefits. Such a development would turn …

U.S. Immigration Policy: Contract Or Human Rights Law?, Victor Romero

Victor C. Romero

The current immigration debate often reflects a tension between affirming the individual rights of migrants against the power of a nation to control its borders. An examination of U.S. Supreme Court precedent reveals that, from our earliest immigration history to the present time, our immigration policy has functioned more like contract law than human rights law, with the Court deferring to the power of Congress to define the terms of that contract at the expense of the immigrant's freedom.

Asians, Gay Marriage, And Immigration: Family Unification At A Crossroads, Victor C. Romero

Victor C. Romero

Family unification has long been a significant component of U.S. immigration policy, and the Asian Pacific American (APA) community has long been a champion of laws that strengthen America's commitment to this goal. The recent emergence of same-gender marriages among state and local governments has caused society to consider more closely its definition of the family, challenging the traditional notion that only civil unions between heterosexuals should be celebrated. But because U.S. immigration law does not include a gay or lesbian partner within its statutory definition of spouse, binational same-gender couples may not legally remain in the country together, even …

The Selective Deportation Of Same-Gender Partners: In Search Of The "Rara Avis", Victor C. Romero

Victor C. Romero

This article seeks to explore the possibility that a selective deportation of a same-gender partner who has overstayed her visa constitutes an outrageous case under the AADC test. Its modest goal is to discourage the INS from ever pursuing such a strategy, knowing that there are probably many who believe that same-gender overstays, even if civilly united in Vermont, are not the ideal candidates for "suspect class" status under U.S. constitutional law. That notwithstanding, common sense and sound doctrine suggest that, despite the many anti-gay and anti-immigrant decisions handed down over the last twenty years, the Court will not hesitate …

Decoupling 'Terrorist' From 'Immigrant': An Enhanced Role For The Federal Courts Post 9/11, Victor C. Romero

Victor C. Romero

Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Attorney General John Ashcroft has utilized the broad immigration power ceded to him by Congress to ferret out terrorists among noncitizens detained for minor immigration violations. Such a strategy provides the government two options: deport those who are not terrorists, and then prosecute others who are. While certainly efficient, using immigration courts and their less formal due process protections afforded noncitizens should trigger greater oversight and vigilance by the federal courts for at least four reasons: First, while the legitimate goal of immigration law enforcement is deportation, Ashcroft's true objective in targeting …

Noncitizen Students And Immigration Policy Post-9/11, Victor Romero

Victor C. Romero

The purpose of this article is to describe the post-9/11 world for noncitizen students and scholars in light of recent federal legislation, specifically focusing on three laws: the USA-PATRIOT Act of 2001, the Border Commuter Student Act of 2002, and the proposed Capital Student Adjustment Act, currently pending in Congress. In all three, Congress is seen trying to walk the fine line between providing fair access to postsecondary education to noncitizen students and guarding against the possibility that such institutions are being used as a springboard for terrorist activity.

The Child Citizenship Act And The Family Reunification Act: Valuing The Citizen Child As Well As The Citizen Parent, Victor Romero

Victor C. Romero

Leading civil rights advocates today lament the degree to which current immigration law fails to maintain family unity. The recent passage of the Child Citizenship Act of 2000 is a rare bipartisan step in the right direction because it grants automatic citizenship to foreign-born children of U.S. citizens upon receipt of their permanent resident status and finalization of their adoption. Congress now has before it the Family Reunification Act of 2001, which aims to restore certain procedural safeguards relaxed in 1996 to ensure that foreign-born parents are not summarily separated from their children, many of whom may be U.S. citizens. …

Aren't You Latino: Building Bridges Upon Common Misperceptions, Victor C. Romero

Victor C. Romero

This article addresses minority on minority oppression and itragroup animosity. The author discusses ways in which communities of color can use common misperceptions to their advantage as a bridge to building a larger community.

Congruence Principle Applied: Rethinking Equal Protection Review Of Federal Alienage Classifications After Adanrand Constructors, Inc. V. Peña, Victor C. Romero

Victor C. Romero

This article suggests that the Supreme Court's 1995 decision in Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Peña constitutes a starting point for a renewed dialogue on the intersection of race, noncitizens' rights, and immigration law. Part I of this Article examines the historical foundations of the plenary power doctrine up to the current dichotomy between judicial review of state and federal alienage classifications under equal protection. Part II reviews the Adarand decision, arguing that Justice O'Connor's congruence principle provides the bulwark for a revision of judicial review of federal legislation, especially in light of the historical and continuing perception of Asian- and …

Immigrant Education And The Promise Of Integrative Egalitarianism, Victor C. Romero

Victor C. Romero

Although not an equal protection case, Martinez v. Regents of the University of California challenges us to grapple with the Supreme Court’s post-Brown commitment to equal opportunity within the context of immigrant higher education. Sadly, Brown’s progeny from Bakke to Parents Involved reveals the cost of embracing a color-blind constitutionalism unmoored from a fundamental commitment to vigilantly combat subordination and dismantle unearned privilege. More optimistically, the Supreme Court’s gay rights jurisprudence developed in Romer v. Evans and Lawrence v. Texas provides insights into how a conservative court can accurately distinguish irrational discrimination from democratic deliberation, a lesson that might help …

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

Victor C. Romero

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 …

Broadening Our World: Citizens And Immigrants Of Color In America, Victor C. Romero

Victor C. Romero

This article was originally presented at a symposium. The article discusses affirmative action and ways of increasing diversity in higher education.

Our Illegal Founders, Victor C. Romero

Victor C. Romero

This Essay briefly mines America’s history to argue that the law setting forth where our national borders are and how strictly we patrol them has always been subject to the vagaries of politics, economics, and perception. Illegal (im)migration has long been part of our migration history, engaged in not just by Latin American border crossers, but also by prominent colonists, giving the lie to the claim that upholding border laws should always be sacrosanct. In many school districts today, the usual summary of American history from our childhood civics classes no longer bypasses the uncomfortable truths of conquest and westward …

Reading (Into) Windsor: Presidential Leadership, Marriage Equality, And Immigration Policy, Victor C. Romero

Victor C. Romero

Following the demise of the federal Defense of Marriage Act in United States v. Windsor, the Obama Administration directed a bold, equality-based reading of Windsor to immigration law, treating bi-national same-sex couples the same as opposite-sex couples. This Essay argues that the President's interpretation is both constitutionally and politically sound: Constitutionally, because it comports with the Executive's power to enforce immigration law and to guarantee equal protection under the law; and politically, because it reflects the current, increasingly tolerant view of marriage equality. Though still in its infancy, President Obama's policy of treating same-sex beneficiary petitions generally the same as …

Alienated: Immigrant Rights, The Constitution, And Equality In America, Victor Romero

Victor C. Romero

Throughout American history, the government has used U.S. citizenship and immigration law to protect privileged groups from less privileged ones, using citizenship as a "legitimate" proxy for otherwise invidious, and often unconstitutional, discrimination on the basis of race. While racial discrimination is rarely legally acceptable today, profiling on the basis of citizenship is still largely unchecked, and has in fact arguable increased in the wake of the September 11 terror attacks on the United States. In this thoughtful examination of the intersection between American immigration and constitutional law, Victor C. Romero draws our attention to a "constitutional immigration law paradox" …

Crossing Borders: Loving V. Virginia As A Story Of Migration, Victor C. Romero

Victor C. Romero

The struggle of binational same-gender partners today parallels the struggles of Mildred and Richard Loving during the heyday of the Civil Rights Movement - not only in the obvious parallels between race and sexual orientation as barriers to freedom, but also in the way the law uses these immutable characteristics to limit the freedom of movement. It is this freedom of movement - this migration or immigration - that I want to focus on in this essay. Lest we forget, the Lovings' story is, importantly, a story of migration: It's a story of the great lengths to which an interracial …

Whatever Happened To The Fourth Amendment: Undocumented Immigrants' Rights After Ins V. Lopenz-Mendoza And United States V. Verdugo-Urquidez, Victor Romero

Victor C. Romero

This Note rejects the Court's approach to the Fourth Amendment in Lopez and Verdugo and attempts to redefine the boundaries of Fourth Amendment protections for undocumented immigrants. Part I examines the impact of the Lopez and Verdugo decisions upon undocumented immigrants' Fourth Amendment rights. Part II evaluates the arguments for extending Fourth Amendment protections to undocumented immigrants. Viewing the Fourth Amendment as a restriction on government intrusion, Part III examines the constitutional remedies available to undocumented immigrants. This part rejects the Lopez restrictions on the applicability of the exclusionary rule and concludes that the Fourth Amendment neither draws distinctions among …

Race, Immigration, And The Department Of Homeland Security, Victor Romero

Victor C. Romero

No abstract provided.

Postsecondary School Education Benefits For Undocumented Immigrants: Promises And Pitfalls, Victor C. Romero

Victor C. Romero

Should longtime undocumented immigrants have the same opportunity as lawful permanent residents and U.S. citizens to attend state colleges and universities? There are two typical justifications for denying them such opportunities. First, treating undocumented immigrants as in-state residents discriminates against U.S. citizen nonresidents of the state. Second, and more broadly, undocumented immigration should be discouraged as a policy matter, and therefore allowing undocumented immigrant children equal opportunities as legal residents condones and perhaps encourages "illegal" immigration. This essay responds to these two concerns by surveying state and federal solutions to this issue.

Interrogating Iqbal: Intent, Inertia, And (A Lack Of) Imagination, Victor C. Romero

Victor C. Romero

In Ashcroft v. Iqbal, the Court reaffirmed the long-standing equal protection doctrine that government actors can only be held liable for discriminatory conduct when they purposefully rely on a forbidden characteristic, such as race or gender, in promulgating policy; to simply know that minorities and women will be adversely affected by the law does not deny these groups equal protection under the law. This Essay interrogates this doctrine by taking a closer look at Iqbal and Feeney, the thirty-year-old precedent the majority cited as the source of its antidiscrimination standard. Because Feeney was cited in neither of the lower court …