Law Commons^™

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 …

Secure Communities: Burdening Local Law Enforcement And Undermining The U Visa, Lindsey J. Gill

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

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.