Law Commons^™

Weighing Pain: How The Harm Of Immigration Detention Must Be Factored In Custody Decisions, Linus Chan

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

The United States is currently in the midst of a “third wave of potential pretrial detention reform.” And while certain reforms are gaining traction in an effort to reduce pretrial criminal detention, efforts to do the same for immigration detention have lagged. Reformers and abolitionists make the case that immigration detention needs to be either restricted or eliminated entirely. Nonetheless, the number of people held in detention for immigration purposes rises year after year. Not only do the numbers of people in immigration detention grow, but the systems in place have grown less concerned with the harsh consequences of detention …

The Emerging Lessons Of Trump V. Hawaii, Shalini Bhargava Ray

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In the years since the Supreme Court decided Trump v. Hawaii, federal district courts have adjudicated dozens of rights-based challenges to executive action in immigration law. Plaintiffs, including U.S. citizens, civil rights organizations, and immigrants themselves, have alleged violations of the First Amendment and the equal protection component of the Due Process Clause with some regularity based on President Trump’s animus toward immigrants. This Article assesses Hawaii’s impact on these challenges to immigration policy, and it offers two observations. First, Hawaii has amplified federal courts’ practice of privileging administrative law claims over constitutional ones. For example, courts considering …

"De-Americanization" During The Trump Administration: Derivative Citizenship And Deceased Parents In The United States, Katheryn J. Maldonado

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

The Trump Administration’s war on immigration will be marked in history as one replete with white supremacy and terror. Much attention has been focused in the realm of undocumented immigrants, detention centers, and family separations because of the pervasiveness of those issues and the gravity of the human rights violations occurring in the United States. However, little focus has been given to immigrants who are lawful permanent residents or naturalized citizens at risk of denaturalization and deprivation of their constitutional rights. This Note highlights the effects of the Trump Administration’s war on immigration on citizens and green card holders in …

Relentless Pursuits: Reflections Of An Immigration And Human Rights Clinician On The Past Four Years, Sarah H. Paoletti

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Deconstructing Invisible Walls: Sotomayor's Dissents In An Era Of Immigration Exceptionalism, Karla Mckanders

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Family In The Balance: Barton V. Barr And The Systematic Violation Of The Right To Family Life In U.S. Immigration Enforcement, David Baluarte

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

The United States systematically violates the international human right to family life in its system of removal of noncitizens. Cancellation of removal provides a means for noncitizens to challenge their removal based on family ties in the United States, but Congress has placed draconian limits on the discretion of immigration courts to cancel removal where noncitizens have committed certain crimes. The recently issued U.S. Supreme Court decision in Barton v. Barr illustrates the troubling trend of affording less discretion for immigration courts to balance family life in removal decisions that involve underlying criminal conduct. At issue was the “stop-time rule” …

The Continuing Legacy Of The National Origin Quotas, Angela M. Banks

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

The Authority Of International Refugee Law, Evan J. Criddle, Evan Fox-Decent

William & Mary Law Review

As COVID-19 has spread around the world, many states have suspended their compliance with a core requirement of international refugee law: the duty to refrain from returning refugees to territories where they face a serious risk of persecution (the duty of non-refoulement). These measures have prompted some observers to question whether non-refoulement will survive the pandemic as a nonderogable legal duty. This Article explains why the international community should embrace non-refoulement as a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) that applies even during public emergencies, such as the coronavirus pandemic. Viewed from a global justice perspective, the …

The Case Against Prosecuting Refugees, Evan J. Criddle

Faculty Publications

Within the past several years, the U.S. Department of Justice has pledged to prosecute asylum-seekers who enter the United States outside an official port of entry without inspection. This practice has contributed to mass incarceration and family separation at the U.S.–Mexico border, and it has prevented bona fide refugees from accessing relief in immigration court. Yet, federal judges have taken refugee prosecution in stride, assuming that refugees, like other foreign migrants, are subject to the full force of American criminal justice if they skirt domestic border controls. This assumption is gravely mistaken.

This Article shows that Congress has not authorized …

The Forgotten Relatives In The Fight Against Family Separation: A Constitutional Analysis Of The Statutory Definition Of Unaccompanied Minors In Immigration Detention, Alysa Williams

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Embracing The Chinese Exclusion Case: An International Law Approach To Racial Exclusions, Lauri Kai

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Scholars Of Mormon History & Law As Amici Curiae In Support Of Neither Party, Anna-Rose Mathieson, Ben Feuer, Nathan B. Oman

Briefs

No abstract provided.

Section 4: Immigration Law Panel, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Amici Curiae Brief Of Scholars Of Mormon History & Law In Support Of Neither Party, Anna-Rose Mathieson, Nathan B. Oman

Briefs

No abstract provided.

Amici Curiae Brief Of Scholars Of American Religious History & Law In Support Of Neither Party, Nathan B. Oman, Anna-Rose Mathieson

Briefs

No abstract provided.

Immigrant Covering, Stella Burch Elias

William & Mary Law Review

Over the last ten years there has been a marked shift in U.S. immigration law away from reliance upon statutory authorization and regulatory provisions to subregulatory or “liminal” rules and discretionary decision-making. This trend is apparent in both federal immigration law and in state and local rulemaking affecting immigrant communities. This Article proposes a new theoretical framework within which to analyze this phenomenon. It uses “covering,” a legal theory first developed in the context of employment discrimination and equal protection, as a lens through which to view these recent developments in immigration law and policy. It shows how immigration laws …

Where The American Dream Becomes A Nightmare: Lgbt Detainees In Immigration Detention Facilities, Lauren Zitsch

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Confronting Cops In Immigration Court, Mary Holper

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Part I of the Article outlines the police report problem by discussing the four situations in which police reports are used in immigration court, why police reports are unreliable, and the scope of the problem. Part II discusses criminal law’s treatment of police reports, focusing on the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment, which provides the constitutional justification for excluding police reports in criminal cases. Part III discusses the use of hearsay evidence in immigration cases, where hearsay is allowed due to the characterization of removal proceedings as civil, not criminal. While there has been a trend to reject unreliable …

Snap: How The Moral Elasticity Of The Denaturalization Statute Goes Too Far, Aram A. Gavoor, Daniel Miktus

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Comprehensive immigration reform is a popular topic in Congress. While many reform bills have been offered, none have addressed the significant substantive and procedural issues surrounding denaturalization, the process where the federal government may seek to have a naturalized person’s citizenship revoked in federal court if his citizenship was unlawfully or fraudulently procured.Though denaturalization serves public policy as a final check on naturalization fraud, existing law also permits the government to denaturalize an individual solely for speech and expressive association that occurs after one acquires citizenship. This provision, 8 U.S.C. § 1451(c), violates naturalized citizens’ First Amendment rights to free …

Who Is Patrolling The Border Of Ethical Conduct?: The Convergence Of Federal Immigration Attorneys, Benefit Fraud, And Model Rule 4.2, Erin E. Barrett

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rethinking Review Standards In Asylum, Andrew Tae-Hyun Kim

William & Mary Law Review

Factual findings drive asylum adjudication. If immigration judges get them wrong, they risk sending refugees back to persecution. Recent studies have exposed an immigration agency that is prone to inaccurate and ill-considered fact-finding due to its structural problems. Without the political will or the financial capital necessary to fix what many acknowledge as a compromised system of adjudication, the agency may continue to render decisions that cast doubt on its capability and expertise. With an agency either unable or unwilling to ensure an accurate and fair fact-finding process, the first meaningful review of an asylum applicant’s claim happens at the …

The States Of Immigration, Rick Su

William & Mary Law Review

Immigration is a national issue and a federal responsibility. So why are states so actively involved? Their legal authority over immigration is questionable. Their institutional capacity to regulate it is limited. Even the legal actions that states take sometimes seem pointless from a regulatory perspective. Why do they enact legislation that essentially copies existing federal law? Why do they pursue regulations that courts are likely to enjoin or strike down? Why do they give so little priority to the immigration laws that do survive?

This Article sheds light on this seemingly irrational behavior. It argues that state laws are being …

Crossing The Final Border: Securing Equal Gender Protection In Immigration Cases, Michelle L. Sudano

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Introduction: Noncitizen Participation In The American Polity, Angela M. Banks

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

"Alien" Litigation As Polity-Participation: The Positive Power Of A "Voteless Class Of Litigants", Daniel Kanstroom

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Workplace Enforcement Workarounds, Stephen Lee

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Dreams Deferred: Deferred Action, Prosecutorial Discretion, And The Vexing Case(S) Of Dream Act Students, Michael A. Olivas

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Section 4: International Law, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 9: Immigration, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Standing To Challenge State And Local Immigration Regulation: How The Notion Of Expressive Injury Can Restore Federal Power Over Immigration, Timothy A. Newman

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.