Law Commons^™

State Responsibility For Forced Migration, Pooja R. Dadhania

Faculty Scholarship

International refugee law does not hold states accountable for the forced migration they cause. Using the international law doctrine of state responsibility, this Article aims to shift the discourse on migration policy towards a state accountability approach that considers the role states play in causing forced migration. This Article uses state responsibility to explore the obligations of a state after it commits a violation of international law that results in forced migration. The general principle undergirding state responsibility is that a state should provide full reparation for harms caused by its violation of an international obligation. Applying state responsibility to …

Paper Terrorists: Independence Movements And The Terrorism Bar, Pooja R. Dadhania

Faculty Scholarship

This Article explores the application of the terrorism bar in immigration law to noncitizens who have participated in an independence movement. It proposes a uniform standard that immigration adjudicators can use to determine whether a foreign entity is a state in order to promote accurate applications of the terrorism bar. The terrorism bar in the Immigration and Nationality Act is broad — it can bar most forms of immigration relief, including asylum, and reaches far beyond ordinary definitions of terrorism. For example, the terrorism bar can block immigration relief for noncitizens who nonviolently supported a militia fighting for independence against …

The Past As Present, Unlearned Lessons And The (Non-) Utility Of International Law, Susan M. Akram

Faculty Scholarship

The contemporary moment provides an acute illustration of the dangers of historical amnesia—as if the Trump Administration’s policies of exclusion, extremist nationalism, and presidential imperialism were singular to ‘now,’ and entirely reversible in the next election. This Article argues to the contrary; that we have been down this road before, and the current crisis in immigration and refugee policies is the inevitable development of trends of racism, including anti-Arab, anti-Muslim racism and xenophobia, that have only become normalized by the populist resurgence of Trumpism. If this premise is correct—that we are experiencing a culmination of a historical trajectory—what lessons from …

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 …

Inter-American Court Of Human Rights Amicus Curiae Brief: The United States Violates International Law When Labor Law Remedies Are Restricted Based On Workers' Migrant Status, Sarah H. Cleveland, Beth Lyon, Rebecca Smith

Faculty Scholarship

Immigrant workers in the United States of America are among the most poorly paid and poorly treated in the workforce. Amici’s attempts to protect the rights of immigrants, including unauthorized workers, have been severely hampered by domestic U.S. laws that discriminate on the basis of alienage and immigration status, and especially by a recent decision of the United States Supreme Court in Hoffman Plastic Compounds, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board, 535 U.S. 137 (2002).

Immigrant workers in particular employment-related visa categories are explicitly excluded from the protections of certain U.S. labor and employment laws. So, too, immigrant workers …

Powers Inherent In Sovereignty: Indians, Aliens, Territories, And The Nineteenth Century Origins Of Plenary Power Over Foreign Affairs, Sarah H. Cleveland

Faculty Scholarship

Does the United States have powers inherent in sovereignty? At least since the 1819 decision in McCulloch v. Maryland, conventional wisdom has held that national government is one of limited, enumerated powers and exercises “only the powers granted to it” by the Constitution and those implied powers “necessary and proper” to the exercise of the delegated powers. All powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states and to the people. In the 1936 decision in United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp., however, the Supreme Court asserted that federal authority over foreign relations operated independently …