Law Commons^™

Enforcing/Protection: The Danger Of Chevron In Refugee Act Cases, Maureen A. Sweeney

Faculty Scholarship

United States immigration courts that decide asylum cases are situated within the Justice Department – a law enforcement agency deeply invested in enforcing border control – and are subordinate to the Attorney General, the nation’s politically appointed chief law enforcement officer. This institutional subjugation of immigration judges and the Board of Immigration Appeals challenges the system’s integrity and leaves people seeking protection promised by international treaty to the whims of an enforcement agency. Courts exacerbate the problem when they give Chevron deference to those Justice Department decisions rather than reviewing them rigorously. Given the prosecutorial nature of the Justice Department, …

Border Fixation: The Appearance Of Security And Control In Immigration Reform, Katherine L. Vaughns

Faculty Scholarship

Immigration reform is the subject of intense discussion among politicians, policy experts, analysts, and advocacy groups alike; America’s never-ending debate which today has been infected with shameless demagoguery, rendering sound policy choices virtually impossible. And in this political cauldron, the appearance of border security and control through symbolism and political rhetoric substitute for the practical realities that are essential to inform policymakers about the appropriate administration and enforcement of U.S. immigration laws. For Congress has had an ongoing, unsound focus on sealing the border it shares with Mexico, its southwestern neighbor, seemingly without regard to costs especially in the post-9/11 …

Of Civil Wrongs And Rights: Kiyemba V. Obama And The Meaning Of Freedom, Separation Of Powers, And The Rule Of Law Ten Years After 9/11, Katherine L. Vaughns, Heather L. Williams

Faculty Scholarship

This article is about the rise and fall of continued adherence to the rule of law, proper application of the separation of powers doctrine, and the meaning of freedom for a group of seventeen Uighurs—a Turkic Muslim ethnic minority whose members reside in the Xinjiang province of China—who had been held at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base since 2002. Most scholars regard the trilogy of Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, and Boumediene v. Bush as demonstrating the Supreme Court’s willingness to uphold the rule of law during the war on terror. The recent experience of the Uighurs …

Chevron Without The Courts? The Supreme Court's Recent Chevron Jurisprudence Through An Immigration Lens, Shruti Rana

Faculty Scholarship

The limits of administrative law are undergoing a seismic shift in the immigration arena. Chevron divides interpretive and decision-making authority between the federal courts and agencies in each of two steps. The Supreme Court may now be transforming this division in largely unrecognized ways. These shifts, currently playing out in the immigration context, may threaten to reshape deference jurisprudence by handing more power to the immigration agency just when the agency may be least able to handle that power effectively.

An unprecedented surge in immigration cases—now approximately 90% of the federal administrative docket—has arrived just as the Court is whittling …

Where Do We Go From Padilla V. Kentucky? Thoughts On Implementation And Future Directions, Maureen A. Sweeney

Faculty Scholarship

On March 31, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court held in the landmark case of Padilla v. Kentucky that the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel in criminal cases includes the right for non-U.S. citizens to be correctly and specifically advised about the likely immigration consequences of a plea agreement. The decision represents an important shift in the way courts have addressed such claims by noncitizen defendants. The Court’s decision recognizes a constitutional requirement that defense counsel provide advice in an area of law in which few defense counsel are knowledgeable, and therefore raises important and difficult questions about …

Penalty And Proportionality In Deportation For Crimes, Maureen A. Sweeney, Hillary Scholten

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Citizenship Under Fire: The Forging Of The New Americans, Shruti Rana

Faculty Scholarship

This essay reviews and critiques two new books on the debate over immigration and citizenship, Anna O. Law, The Immigration Battle in American Courts, and Ediberto Roman, Citizenship and Its Exclusions: A Classical, Constitutional, and Critical Race Critique. Law’s book takes a procedural approach to unraveling the complex immigration cases emanating from the U.S. courts of appeals and the U.S. Supreme Court. This essay challenges some of Law’s conclusions and suggests methodological alterations that may strengthen her key arguments. Roman’s book is distinct from Law’s in that it takes on a much broader historical and procedurialist view of the …

Fact Or Fiction: The Legal Construction Of Immigration Removal For Crimes, Maureen A. Sweeney

Faculty Scholarship

Thousands of long-term legal permanent residents are deported from the United States each year because they have been convicted of criminal offenses, many quite minor. These deportations occur without any of the constitutional safeguards that generally protect criminal defendants. Immigration authorities rely on cases asserting that such deportations are not punishment for the crime, but merely collateral consequences of the conviction. This article challenges that reasoning. It argues that its factual and doctrinal foundation has completely disintegrated over the last 20 years. Far-reaching changes in immigration law and enforcement have rendered deportation for aggravated felonies a “definite, immediate and largely …

"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. …

Collateral Consequences Of Criminal Convictions To Noncitizens, Fernando A. Nuñez

Faculty Scholarship

The criminal defense attorney's intuitive pursuit of freedom for a client is almost always the best approach in the representation of individuals charged with a crime. When representing noncitizens, however, the prudent practice is to deemphasize immediate freedom and instead to focus on the collateral consequences the conviction will have on the noncitizen's immigration status.

Taming The Asylum Adjudication Process: An Agenda For The Twenty-First Century, Katherine L. Vaughns

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.