Law Commons^™

Questioning The Legitimacy Of The Expedited Removal Process – The Tall Task Of Protecting The Constitutional Rights Of One Of America’S Most Marginalized Groups, Jacob J. Bourquin

Cleveland State Law Review

This Note explores the origin and development of 8 U.S.C. § 1225—a heavily debated facet of the United States’ immigration law. Section 1225, colloquially referred to as the “expedited removal process,” has been interpreted to permit low-level immigration officers to summarily remove certain “arriving” noncitizens from the United States without affording them the procedural due process protections guaranteed under the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution to all individuals present in the United States. This Note posits that the current interpretation of § 1225, particularly the interpretation of “is arriving,” and application of the expedited removal process is inconsistent …

The U.S. Government Taking Under Eminent Domain: When Just Compensation Is Unjust (Comment), Michael Perez

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

The true effects of private takings do not occur in a vacuum and are not solely academic in nature. The consequence of losing property implicates loss of income, loss of value in residual property, and loss of familial land. The importance of protecting the rights of individual land-owners becomes increasingly apparent when analyzing the effect of the taking.

This comment will explore how the government’s taking of private property occurs—including how the government has loosened restrictions and procedural hurdles. The analysis will focus specifically on processes, policies, and statutes, created and used by the federal government to facilitate takings necessary …

Why Cost/Benefit Balancing Tests Don't Exist: How To Dispel A Delusion That Delays Justice For Immigrants, Joshua J. Schroeder

West Virginia Law Review

In 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court nullified its earlier presumption that indefinite immigrant detention without bond hearings is unconstitutional under Zadvydas v. Davis. If Zadvydas is a nullity, those who raise due process balancing tests during the post-removal-period in immigrant habeas review may need to find new grounds for review. However, since Boumediene v. Bush was decided in 2008, there are several reasons not to despair Zadvydas’s demise

.

For one, Zadvydas spoke to an extremely narrow subset of cases. It granted a concession under the Due Process Clause to immigrants detained beyond the statutory 90-day removal period. It …

Discretionary Injustice: Limiting Due Process Rights Of Undocumented Immigrants Upon Removal After Re-Entry, Brendan Dauscher

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

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.

How To Decrease The Immigration Backlog: Expand Representation And End Unnecessary Detention, Kara A. Naseef

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Note recommends federal policy reform and local implementation in order to decrease the immigration backlog and protect the rights of non-citizens in immigration proceedings. Although non-citizens hold many of the fundamental rights and freedoms enumerated in the Constitution, several core rights— including due process and the right to counsel—are not rigorously upheld in the context of immigration proceeding. By carefully regulating expanded access to representation and ending unnecessary immigration detention, the Executive Office of Immigration Review and Congress will ensure the swift administration of justice and protect non-citizens under the federal government’s jurisdiction.

The Asylum Makeover: Chevron Deference, The Self-Referral And Review Authority, Jessica Senat

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

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. …

The Privileges And Immunities Of Non-Citizens, R. George Wright

Cleveland State Law Review

However paradoxically, in some practically important contexts, non-citizens of all sorts can rightly claim what amount to privileges and immunities of citizens. This follows from a careful and entirely plausible understanding of the inherently relational, inescapably social, and essentially reciprocal nature of at least some typical privileges and immunities.

This Article contends that the relationship between constitutional privileges and immunities and citizenship is more nuanced, and much more interesting, than usually recognized. Crucially, allowing some non-citizens to invoke the privileges and immunities of citizens often makes sense. The intuitive sense that non-citizens cannot logically claim the privileges or immunities of …

Rethinking Conspiracy Jurisdiction In Light Of Stream Of Commerce And Effects-Based Jurisdictional Principles, Alex Carver

Vanderbilt Law Review

For decades, some courts have been willing to exercise personal jurisdiction over nonresident defendants based solely on the forum contacts of their coconspirators. This practice, termed "conspiracy jurisdiction," has proven controversial among courts and commentators alike. On one hand, the actions of one member of a conspiracy are ordinarily attributable to other members of the conspiracy, and jurisdiction-conferring acts should arguably be no exception. On the other hand, attributing forum contacts from one actor to another based solely on their joint membership in a civil conspiracy seems to stretch due process protections to the breaking point. This Note provides new …

Finality Of A Conviction: A Noncitizen's Right To Procedural Due Process, Daniela Mondragon

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming

Finding A Right To Remain: Immigration, Deportation, And Due Process, Simon Y. Svirnovskiy

Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy

No abstract provided.

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 …

Proposing A One-Year Time Bar For 8 U.S.C. § 1226(C), Jenna Neumann

Michigan Law Review

Section 1226(c) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) requires federal detention of certain deportable noncitizens when those noncitizens leave criminal custody. This section applies only to noncitizens with a criminal record (“criminal noncitizens”). Under section 1226(c), the Attorney General must detain for the entire course of his or her removal proceedings any noncitizen who has committed a qualifying offense “when the alien is released” from criminal custody. Courts construe this phrase in vastly different ways when determining whether a criminal noncitizen will be detained. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) and the Fourth Circuit read “when …

The Executive Power Of Process In Immigration Law, Jill E. Family

Chicago-Kent Law Review

This article, part of an AALS symposium on executive power during the Obama administration, focuses on the role of procedure in the president’s implementation of immigration law. The president undeniably has power over immigration law, but the exact contours of that power are not clear. At times, the president acts via delegation from Congress. The president also may have inherent power over immigration law that is not dependent on a delegation. Such inherent power would be subject to the president’s discretion. Even when acting pursuant to delegated immigration power, the president operates within a wide ring of discretion granted by …

Plenary Power Is Dead! Long Live Plenary Power, Michael Kagan

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

For decades, scholars of immigration law have anticipated the demise of the plenary power doctrine. The Supreme Court could have accomplished this in its recent decision in Kerry v. Din, or it could have reaffirmed plenary power. Instead, the Court produced a splintered decision that did neither. This Essay examines the long process of attrition that has significantly gutted the traditional plenary power doctrine with regard to procedural due process, while leaving it largely intact with regard to substantive constitutional rights.

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 …

Charles Demore V. Hyung Joon Kim: Antoher Step Away From Full Due Process Protections, Brian Smith

Akron Law Review

Part II of this note traces the development of substantive due process protections for aliens, including general due process jurisprudence, the statutory authority for detaining criminal aliens, significant Supreme Court decisions, and approaches taken by the circuit courts. Part III examines the Supreme Court’s decision in Hyung Joon Kim. Part IV evaluates the due process analysis used by the Court and addresses the implications of this decision. Part V of this note concludes that the Court’s strained departure from strict scrutiny and its failure to provide an adequate explanation of the departure will have implications for aliens, citizens, and future …

The Efficacy Of Indefinite Detention: Assessment Of Immigration Case Law In Kiyemba V. Obama, Hansdeep Singh

University of Massachusetts Law Review

This note discusses the potential indefinite detention, also called preventative detention, of the Uighur detainees. Until early 2010, the U.S. Government had been unable to resettle seventeen Uighurs for over 5 years. In 2009, the Supreme Court, granted certiorari on the issue of whether federal courts have the authority to ―order the release of prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay 'where the Executive detention is indefinite and without authorization in law, and release into the continental United States is the only possible effective remedy.‘ However, on March 1, 2010, the Supreme Court vacated and remanded the case to the United States …

The Extraterritorial Application Of The Fifth Amendment: A Need For Expanded Constitutional Protections., Guinevere E. Moore, Robert T. Moore

St. Mary's Law Journal

Since 2010, there have been forty-three cases—and ten deaths—involving the use of deadly force by United States agents against Mexican nationals along the border. Currently, the official policy is that officers may still use deadly force where they “reasonably believe”—based upon the totality of the circumstances—that they are in “imminent danger” of death or serious injury. Officers were found reasonable in using deadly force in situations as mundane as young boys throwing rocks. In light of these actions, the Mexican government has raised serious concerns about the disproportionate use of force by United States agents. The question now raised is …

Striking A Balance: The Conflict Between Safety And Due Process Rights - The Practical Implications Of Zadvydas V. Davis, Alicia Brown

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

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

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

Today, an immigrant green card holder mandatorily detained pending his removal proceedings, without bail and without counsel, due to a minor crime committed perhaps long ago, faces a dire fate. If he contests his case, he may remain incarcerated in substandard conditions for months or years. While incarcerated, he will likely be unable to acquire a lawyer, access family who might assist him, obtain key evidence, or contact witnesses. In these circumstances, he will nearly inevitably lose his deportation case and be banished abroad from work, family, and friends. The immigrant's one chance to escape these cascading events is the …

Can Immune Parties Really Be Responsible: An Analysis Of The Current Interpretation Of The Texas Responsible Third Party Statute And Its Vulnerability To Constitutional Challenge., Justin C. Roberts, Randell Roberts

St. Mary's Law Journal

The Texas Responsible Third Party (RTP) statute was amended in 2003 to give defendants the opportunity to have the jury apportion responsibility for the plaintiff’s damages to persons who were not joined in the lawsuit. A defendant could achieve this result by designating a “responsible third party.” Plaintiffs may often join responsible third parties as additional defendants. Under such situations, all culpable parties are before the court, defending themselves, and accountable to the plaintiff for their percentage of responsibility. When the statute worked in this fashion it achieved “a carefully constructed scheme balancing the interests of both defendants and claimants.” …

Congress's Consistent Intent To Utilize Military Commissions In The War Against Al-Qaeda And Its Adoption Of Commission Rules That Fully Comply With Due Process., Michael T. Mccaul, Ronald J. Sievert

St. Mary's Law Journal

Congress responded to the terrorist attack of September 11, 2001 by passing the Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF). In the following years Congress augmented that authority with the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA of 2006) and the Military Commissions Act of 2009 (MCA of 2009). In passing these acts, Congress responded to the Supreme Court’s decision in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, which found that President Bush’s attempt to establish military commissions required Congressional authorization. When drafting both MCAs, Congress recognized numerous evidentiary and trial procedures from federal civilian court were inappropriate for trying unlawful combatants. By these …

Home Sweet Homestead - Not If You Are Subject To A Mandatory Homeowners' Association., Bridget M. Fuselier

St. Mary's Law Journal

Changes must be made to current Texas laws to strike a proper balance between the homeowners’ rights and the homeowners association’s (HOA) rights. The Texas Supreme Court’s decision in Inwood North Homeowners’ Ass’n v. Harris allows liens to attach to what would otherwise be considered homestead-protected property. Although the promise in Inwood was set forth in writing, touched and concerned the land, was intended to run with the land, and was properly recorded, that did not create a contractual lien. The court, however, incorrectly combined the concepts of liens and covenants. Furthermore, the court seemed to ignore the important and …

The Constitutionality Of Collateral Post-Conviction Claims Of Actual Innocence Comment., Craig M. Jacobs

St. Mary's Law Journal

The notion that the state can punish innocent people disrupts public confidence in the usefulness of the criminal justice system. If, by legislative design, the criminal justice system is not concerned with or is accepting of situations where innocent people are punished by the state, should courts take immediate action? Once criminal defendants exhaust the appellate process, Supreme Court Justices have stated, federal courts should not hear claims of actual innocence. Such statements are supported by the federal habeas corpus statute as amended by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA). AEDPA requires federal habeas courts to …

The Future Of Discriminatory Local Ordinances Aimed At Regulating Illegal Immigration, John Ryan Syllaios

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

The Unconstitutionality Of Mississippi's Employment Protection Act And A Framework For Assessing Similar State Immigration Employment Laws, Nicholas Neidzwski

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Procedural And Judicial Limitations On Voir Dire - Constitutional Implications And Preservation Of Error In Civil Cases., R. Brent Cooper, Diana L. Faust

St. Mary's Law Journal

The right to a trial by jury is meaningless without an effective voir dire. Recurring tort reform, rapid technological advancements, immediate access to media coverage of incidents that give rise to litigation have greatly expanded. Consequentially, courts are faced with the prospect that potential jurors’ opinions and attitudes have been tainted. In addition to these issues, trial courts display significant interest in promptly expediting the advancement of their dockets. Voir dire is an essential element of trial strategy. Voir dire allows counsel to establish rapport with potential jurors, introduce them to the issues and facts of the case, and identify …