Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 10 of 10
Full-Text Articles in Law
Judicial Deference Of The Board Of Immigration Appeals’ Regulatory Interpretations In Light Of Kisor V. Wilkie, Melissa Fullmer
Judicial Deference Of The Board Of Immigration Appeals’ Regulatory Interpretations In Light Of Kisor V. Wilkie, Melissa Fullmer
St. Mary's Law Journal
Abstract forthcoming.
Pepperdine University School Of Law Legal Summaries, Analise Nuxoll
Pepperdine University School Of Law Legal Summaries, Analise Nuxoll
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
No abstract provided.
Pepperdine University School Of Law Legal Summaries, Analise Nuxoll
Pepperdine University School Of Law Legal Summaries, Analise Nuxoll
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
No abstract provided.
Why Guidance From The Supreme Court Is Required In Redefining The Particular Social Group Definition In Refugee Law, Liliya Paraketsova
Why Guidance From The Supreme Court Is Required In Redefining The Particular Social Group Definition In Refugee Law, Liliya Paraketsova
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
One of the most debated topics in refugee law has been the meaning of particular social group (PSG)—one of the five categories used to claim refugee status. In 2006, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) adopted a narrower PSG definition. Since that adoption, a circuit split has persisted over the meaning of PSG. Two circuits in particular have continually refused to adopt this definition—even when the BIA attempted to revise the definition in response to their criticism. This Note proposes a reform that would include a compromise between the two current definitions of PSG by rejecting the BIA’s particularity requirement …
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, …
Extradition - Denial Of Asylum - Withholding Deportation - Different Tactics Used By The Attorney General To Deliver Provisional Irish Republican Army Members To The British: Doherty V. United States, 908 F.2d 1108 (2d Cir. 1990), William Roebuck
Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law
No abstract provided.
An Insurmountable Obstacle: Denying Deference To The Bia’S Social Visibility Requirement, Kathleen Kersh
An Insurmountable Obstacle: Denying Deference To The Bia’S Social Visibility Requirement, Kathleen Kersh
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
In the last fifteen years, the Board of Immigration Appeals has imposed a requirement that persons seeking asylum based on membership in a particular social group must establish that the social group is “socially visible” throughout society. This Comment argues that the social visibility requirement should be denied administrative deference on several grounds. The requirement should be denied Chevron deference because Congress’s intent behind the Refugee Act of 1980 is clear and unambiguous and, alternatively, the requirement is an impermissible interpretation of the statute. The requirement is also arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedures Act. This Comment argues that …
Judulang V. Holder And The Future Of 212(C) Relief, Patrick J. Glen
Judulang V. Holder And The Future Of 212(C) Relief, Patrick J. Glen
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
On December 12, 2011, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Judulang v. Holder, a case addressing the Board of Immigration Appeals’ use of the comparable grounds approach for determining eligibility for relief under former section 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The Court held that this approach was arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act, and remanded for the agency to determine a new way for determining the eligibility of deportable aliens for 212(c) relief. The purpose of this article is to place the Court’s decision in its proper historical context and to chart the …
"Streamlining" The Rule Of Law: How The Department Of Justice Is Undermining Judicial Review Of Agency Action, Shruti Rana
"Streamlining" The Rule Of Law: How The Department Of Justice Is Undermining Judicial Review Of Agency Action, Shruti Rana
Faculty Scholarship
Judicial review of administrative decision making is an essential institutional check on agency power. Recently, however, the Department of Justice dramatically revised its regulations in an attempt to insulate its decision making from public and federal court scrutiny. These “streamlining” rules, carried out in the name of national security and immigration reform, have led to a breakdown in the rule of law in our judicial system. While much attention has been focused on the Department of Justice’s recent attempts to shield executive power from the reach of Congress, its efforts to undermine judicial review have so far escaped such scrutiny. …
The Effect Of Expungement On Removability Of Non-Citizens, James A.R. Nafziger, Michael Yimesgen
The Effect Of Expungement On Removability Of Non-Citizens, James A.R. Nafziger, Michael Yimesgen
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
For most of the twentieth century, a non-citizen was generally not subject to removal on the basis of a criminal conviction which had been expunged by the state that rendered the conviction. During that time, the definition of a "conviction" for purposes of immigration law was borrowed from the law of the state which rendered the criminal conviction. In the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IRIRA) of 1996 Congress sought to provide a more uniform definition of the term "conviction" sufficient to justify an order of removal under the immigration law. The IIRIRA does not mention expungement, however. …