Law Commons^™

Heirs Of An Administration: Unlawful Executive Actions, Jerome Perez

Catholic University Law Review

The Supreme Court of the United States in DHS v. Regents on June 18, 2020, decided to stall the Trump administration from rescinding the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) policy that the Obama administration created contrary to the Administrative Procedures Act (APA)––even though in 2016 the Supreme Court affirmed a preliminary injunction on the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA) policy, which mirrors DACA. This blunder offhandedly sacrifices the Supreme Court’s reputation as nonpartisan by enlisting itself as the future arbiter of administrative issues with self-evident resolutions and deciding contrary to those resolutions to endorse a political agenda. …

Requiring The Executive To Turn Square Corners: The Supreme Court Increases Agency Accountability In Department Of Homeland Security V. Regents Of The University Of California, Claudia J. Bernstein

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Administrative agencies frequently promulgate rules that have dramatic effects on peoples’ lives. Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (“DACA”) is one such example. DACA grants certain unlawful immigrants a temporary reprieve from deportation, as well as ancillary benefits such as work permits. In 2017, the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) sought to rescind DACA on the basis that the program violates the Immigration and Nationality Act.

This Comment analyzes the recent Supreme Court decision about DACA’s recission in Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of University of California. In rejecting DHS’s attempt to rescind DACA, the Court strengthened agency accountability …

The Substantial Impact Approach: Reviewing Policy Statements In Light Of Apa Finality, Emily Parsons

Washington Law Review

Federal agencies engage in a wide range of non-binding action, issuing guidance documents such as policy statements and interpretive rules. Although these guidance documents may have a substantial impact on industries or members of the public, courts often refuse to review their substance. The Administrative Procedure Act requires agency action to be “final” before courts can review it. The D.C. Circuit and the Ninth Circuit have taken conflicting and often messy approaches in determining whether interpretive rules and policy statements are final and thus reviewable. This Comment proposes a new approach: the substantial impact approach. Under this approach—repurposed from a …

Lawful Permanent Residency: A Potential Solution For Temporary Protected Status Holders In The Eastern District Of New York, Cody M. Gecht

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

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

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Give Use Your Tired, Your Poor, Your Huddled Masses . . . Except When They Have Hiv: An Analysis Of Current United States Immigration Policy Regarding Hiv-Positive Aliens In Light Of Guantanamo Bay, Jason W. Konvicka

University of Richmond Law Review

On September 30, 1991, a party of military leaders overthrew the first democratically elected government in Haitian history. Although Haiti's former president, Jean Bertrand Aristide escaped to safety, many of his supporters were not so fortunate. Numerous Haitians were tortured and killed due to their political affiliation. Fearing similar persecution, thousands of Haitian nationals abandoned their belongings and fled to the high seas in an attempt to reach the United States. Soon thereafter, the United States Coast Guard began interdicting an increasing number of Haitian boats as they made their way into international waters.