Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 14 of 14
Full-Text Articles in Civil Rights and Discrimination
It Is Time To Get Back To Basics On The Border, Donna Coltharp
It Is Time To Get Back To Basics On The Border, Donna Coltharp
The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice
Abstract forthcoming.
Sanctuary Cities And The Trump Administration: The Practical Limits Of Federal Power, Joshua W. Dansby
Sanctuary Cities And The Trump Administration: The Practical Limits Of Federal Power, Joshua W. Dansby
The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice
On January 25, 2017, President Donald J. Trump signed an executive order with the supposed purpose of enhancing public safety of the interior of the United States. Part of the Administration’s plan includes threatening “sanctuary jurisdictions,” also known as “sanctuary cities,” with the loss of federal funds for failing to comply with federal law, specifically 8 U.S.C. § 1373.
There are several problems with this plan: (1) there is no solid definition for what makes a city a “sanctuary;” (2) if we accept the Administration’s allusion that a sanctuary jurisdiction is one that “willfully” refuses to comply with 8 U.S.C. …
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
Justice For Noncitizens: A Case For Reforming The Immigration Legal System, Anna Paden Carson
Justice For Noncitizens: A Case For Reforming The Immigration Legal System, Anna Paden Carson
VA Engage Journal
The immigration legal system exists as a function of the executive branch rather than the judicial branch, and many of the constitutional rights guaranteed in a judicial court do not continue into the immigration legal sphere. Noncitizen defendants in the immigration court system are not guaranteed the same due process rights or right to appointed counsel as United States citizens, which severely limits their chance of a successful outcome. Moreover, while many noncitizens await their trials in these courts, they are often placed in one of the 234 immigration detention facilities across the nation, which further exacerbates the direness of …
Substantive Due Process For Noncitizens: Lessons From Obergefell, Anthony O'Rourke
Substantive Due Process For Noncitizens: Lessons From Obergefell, Anthony O'Rourke
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
The state of Texas denies birth certificates to children born in the United States—and thus citizens under the Fourteenth Amendment—if their parents are undocumented immigrants with identification provided by their home countries’ consulates. What does this have to do with same-sex marriage? In a previous article, I demonstrated that the Supreme Court’s substantive due process analysis in United States v. Windsor is particularly relevant to the state’s regulation of undocumented immigrants. This Essay builds on my earlier analysis by examining United States v. Obergefell’s applications outside the context of same-sex marriage. Obergefell’s due process holding, I argue, can …
Decoupling 'Terrorist' From 'Immigrant': An Enhanced Role For The Federal Courts Post 9/11, Victor C. Romero
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 …
Immigrants Unshackled: The Unconstitutional Use Of Indiscriminate Restraints, Fatma E. Marouf
Immigrants Unshackled: The Unconstitutional Use Of Indiscriminate Restraints, Fatma E. Marouf
Fatma E Marouf
This Article challenges the constitutionality of indiscriminately restraining civil immigration detainees during removal proceedings. Not only are immigration detainees routinely placed in handcuffs, leg irons, and belly chains without any individualized determination of the need for restraints, but Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the prosecuting party, makes the decisions about the use of restraints, rather than the judge. After examining the rationale for the well-established prohibition against the indiscriminate use of restraints during criminal and civil jury trials, and discussing how some courts have extended this rationale to bench trials, this Article contends that ICE’s practice violates substantive and procedural …
Immigrants Unshackled: The Unconstitutional Use Of Indiscriminate Restraints, Fatma Marouf
Immigrants Unshackled: The Unconstitutional Use Of Indiscriminate Restraints, Fatma Marouf
Fatma Marouf
Montes-Lopez V. Holder: Applying Eldridge To Ensure A Per Se Right To Counsel For Indigent Immigrants In Removal Proceedings, Soulmaz Taghavi
Montes-Lopez V. Holder: Applying Eldridge To Ensure A Per Se Right To Counsel For Indigent Immigrants In Removal Proceedings, Soulmaz Taghavi
Soulmaz Taghavi
Part I of this Comment reviews the historical and current state of procedural due process and its role in Immigration Law, specifically removal proceedings. Part II extends certain legal arguments in the opinion of Montes-Lopez v. Holder, which held among divided federal Circuit Courts that an immigrant in removal proceedings has a statutory and constitutional right to appointed counsel. Last, Part III demonstrates how a non-citizen in deportation hearing has a per se right to counsel outlined by the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and brought to life by the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause.
Was The First Justice Harlan Anti-Chinese?, James W. Gordon
Was The First Justice Harlan Anti-Chinese?, James W. Gordon
Faculty Scholarship
The first Justice John Marshall Harlan has long been recognized as a defender of Black civil rights. Yet some scholars challenge Harlan’s egalitarian reputation by arguing that he was anti-Chinese. In this Article, the Author discusses the evidence which has been offered to support the claim that Harlan was anti-Chinese and offers additional evidence never before presented to argue against this hypothesis. Harlan’s critics have assembled some evidence in a way that suggests Harlan had an anti-Chinese bias. The Author suggests that the evidence is ambiguous and that it can be assembled to produce a different picture from the one …
Promoting Language Access In The Legal Academy, Gillian Dutton, Beth Lyon, Jayesh M. Rathold, Deborah M. Weissman
Promoting Language Access In The Legal Academy, Gillian Dutton, Beth Lyon, Jayesh M. Rathold, Deborah M. Weissman
University of Maryland Law Journal of Race, Religion, Gender and Class
"Promoting Language Access in the Legal Academy," details the progress made by the legal profession in meeting the needs of individuals with limited English language proficiency. The authors outlines the current need, summarizes various approaches taken by law schools, and emphasizes the value of training bilingual law students as well as mobilizing a cadre of undergraduate interpreters.
Cascading Constitutional Deprivation: The Right To Appointed Counsel For Mandatorily Detained Immigrants Pending Removal Proceedings, Mark Noferi
Mark L Noferi
When a Department of Homeland Security officer mandatorily detains a green card holder without bail pending his removal proceedings, for a minor crime committed perhaps long ago, the immigrant’s life takes a drastic turn. If he contests his case, he likely will remain incarcerated in substandard conditions for months or years, often longer than for his original crime, and be unable to acquire a lawyer, access family whom might assist, or access key evidence or witnesses. In these circumstances, it is all but certain he will lose his deportation case, sometimes wrongfully, and be banished abroad from work, family, and …
The Executive's Scapegoat, The Court's Blind Eye? Immigrants' Rights After September 11, Hollis V. Pfitsch
The Executive's Scapegoat, The Court's Blind Eye? Immigrants' Rights After September 11, Hollis V. Pfitsch
Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice
No abstract provided.
Decoupling 'Terrorist' From 'Immigrant': An Enhanced Role For The Federal Courts Post 9/11, Victor C. Romero
Decoupling 'Terrorist' From 'Immigrant': An Enhanced Role For The Federal Courts Post 9/11, Victor C. Romero
Journal Articles
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 …