Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Administrative Law

Selected Works

2014

Immigration Law

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Does The Legal Standard Matter? Empirical Answers To Justice Kennedy’S Questions In Nken V. Holder, Christopher J. Walker May 2014

Does The Legal Standard Matter? Empirical Answers To Justice Kennedy’S Questions In Nken V. Holder, Christopher J. Walker

Christopher J. Walker

In response to Fatma Marouf, Michael Kagan & Rebecca Gill, Justice on the Fly: The Danger of Errant Deportations, 75 Ohio St. L.J. 337 (2014).

In Justice on the Fly: The Danger of Errant Deportations, Professors Fatma Marouf, Michael Kagan, and Rebecca Gill take on the ambitious task of answering the empirical questions posed by Justice Kennedy and others in Nken v. Holder with respect to the proper legal standard for judicial stays of removal in the immigration adjudication context. To answer these questions, the authors review, code, and analyze 1,646 cases in all circuits that hear immigration appeals and …


Freedmen And Day Laborers: Why Enforcement Matters, Raja Raghunath Feb 2014

Freedmen And Day Laborers: Why Enforcement Matters, Raja Raghunath

Raja Raghunath

As the one hundred and fiftieth anniversary of Emancipation approaches, there is a cautionary lesson for modern workers from the period that followed the abolition of chattel slavery. Reconstruction, after the Civil War, was the moment when the promise of universal liberty to work first became part of the American state’s covenant with its people. But this promise was quickly lost, as the rights that the federal government extended to the freed slaves – the freedmen – were contested and eventually nullified by vehement opposition in the working fields and cities of the South. In this sense, workers’ rights were …


The Ordinary Remand Rule And The Judicial Toolbox For Agency Dialogue, Christopher J. Walker Jan 2014

The Ordinary Remand Rule And The Judicial Toolbox For Agency Dialogue, Christopher J. Walker

Christopher J. Walker

When a court concludes that an agency’s decision is erroneous, the ordinary rule is to remand to the agency to consider the issue anew (as opposed to the court deciding the issue itself). Despite that the Supreme Court first articulated this ordinary remand rule in the 1940s and has rearticulated it repeatedly over the years, little work has been done to understand how the rule works in practice, much less whether it promotes the separation-of-powers values that motivate the rule. This Article is the first to conduct such an investigation—focusing on judicial review of agency immigration adjudications and reviewing the …