Law Commons^™

The One-Year Bar To Asylum In The Age Of The Immigration Court Backlog, Lindsay M. Harris

Journal Articles

Imagine being forced to flee your home, separated from your children, and undergoing the perilous journey to seek safety and protection in the United States. Upon arrival, you are immediately detained and questioned about your intentions. You explain that you fear for your life and seek asylum protection. You may even undergo a detailed interview with an asylum officer, who finds that you have a significant possibility of establishing asylum eligibility. You are released from detention to pursue your asylum claim in immigration court. You diligently attend check-ins with an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer for the next two years …

The Aftermath Of United States V. Texas, Shoba S. Wadhia

Journal Articles

On June 23, 2016, the Supreme Court issued a 4-4 ruling in the immigration case of United States v. Texas, blocking two “deferred action” programs announced by President Obama on November 20, 2014: extended Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA Plus) and Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Legal Residents (DAPA). The 4-4 ruling by the justices creates a non-precedential non-decision, upholding an injunction placed by a panel of federal judges in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. While the future of these programs remains uncertain in the long term, the immediate effects are pronounced, as millions of …

From Surviving To Thriving? An Investigation Of Asylee Integration In The United States, Lindsay M. Harris

Journal Articles

This article assesses the efficacy of the legal framework for asylees, individuals granted refugee status within the United States, through an examination of the human outcomes following the grant of asylum. To understand how the asylee benefits system actually functions, I conducted more than fifty field interviews with advocates, service providers, and government officials in the San Francisco Bay Area and the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area. This research fills a conspicuous gap in our understanding of what happens after the grant of asylum and reveals a number of insights about the ways in which the prevailing laws, policies, and programs …

The 'New Selma' And The Old Selma: Arizona, Alabama, And The Immigration Civil Rights Movement In The Twenty-First Century, Kristina M. Campbell

Journal Articles

In his unfinished manuscript, “The Politics of Expulsion: A Short History of Alabama’s Anti-Immigrant Law, HB 56,” the late Raymond A. Mohl, Distinguished Professor of History at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, directly and succinctly identified the true nature of the motivations behind the passage of HB 56 in the Alabama legislature. Professor Mohl observed that “nativist fears of large numbers of ethnically different newcomers, especially over job competition and unwanted cultural change, sometimes referred to as “cultural dilution,” provided political cover for politicians who sought to control and regulate immigration within state borders, but also to push illegal …

Remarks On Executive Action And Immigration Reform, Shoba S. Wadhia

Journal Articles

This essay places the President's executive actions on immigration last November into a larger context by providing a brief history of prosecutorial discretion in immigration cases. This essay also describes how law students at Penn State Law School used the President's announcement of executive actions as a platform for local change in the State College community.

The President And Deportation: Daca, Dapa, And The Sources And Limits Of Executive Authority - Response To Hiroshi Motomura, Shoba S. Wadhia

Journal Articles

This Essay is a response to Washburn University School of Law's Foulston Siefkin Lecture, 2015 titled "The President and Deportation: DACA, DAPA, and the Sources and Limits of Executive Authority," delivered by Professor Hiroshi Motomura in March of 2015. Part II of this Essay provides a summary of Professor Motomura's remarks from this author's vantage point. Part III of this Essay analyzes and supports Professor Motomura's conclusion that deferred action is "different" from prosecutorial discretion and elaborates on how deferred action goes one step "further" than prosecutorial discretion.

Is Immigration Law National Security Law?, Shoba S. Wadhia

Journal Articles

The debate around how to keep America safe and welcome newcomers is prominent. In the last year, cities and countries around the world, including Baghdad, Dhaka, Istanbul, Paris, Beirut, Mali and inside the United States - have been vulnerable to terrorist attacks and human tragedy. Meanwhile, the world faces the largest refugee crises since the Second World War.

This article is based on remarks delivered at Emory Law Journal’s annual Thrower Symposium on February 11, 2016. It explores how national security concerns have shaped recent immigration policy in the Executive Branch, Congress and the states and the moral, legal and …

Beyond Deportation: Understanding Immigration Prosecutorial Discretion And United States V. Texas, Shoba S. Wadhia

Journal Articles

In this article, I place the Supreme Court case of United States v. Texas into a broader context by describing the history and legal authority for prosecutorial discretion in immigration law and highlighting the contents and recommendations in my book, Beyond Deportation: The Role of Prosecutorial Discretion in Immigration Cases. Part I of this article offers a primer on the role of prosecutorial discretion in immigration law and also describes two related programs announced by President Obama on November 20, 2014 and the subject of litigation for nearly two years as of this writing. Part II provides a history …

Telling Refugee Stories: Trauma, Credibility, And The Adversarial Adjudication Of Claims For Asylum, Stephen Paskey

Journal Articles

When trauma survivors seek asylum in the United States, the deck is stacked against them. In most cases, the applicant’s story is the only direct evidence of the applicant’s claim, and asylum is certain to be denied if a judge finds the applicant not credible. But the stories told by trauma survivors defy cultural norms for a credible story: they are often inconsistent, vague, and both logically and chronologically disjointed. As a result, asylum may be wrongly denied. The problem is inherent in our asylum adjudication system, which subjects most applicants to an adversarial hearing.

This article uses scholarship on …