Law Commons^™

Texas's "Operation Lone Star": The Supremacy Clause And Dual Federalism In Light Of Arizona V. United States, Reynaldo Ramirez, Jr

Texas A&M Law Review

The Supremacy Clause of Article Six of the United States Constitution was enacted to remedy the failures of the Articles of Confederation. Initially, the states enjoyed near-boundless state sovereignty in nearly all aspects of the first federalist government. However, in practice, the necessity of federal supremacy for conducting the business of governing obligated the states to prioritize national interests above the states’ sovereignty. To do so required revision of the Articles of Confederation. This drafting culminated in the contentious ratification of the Constitution in 1788, including the Supremacy Clause and the Tenth Amendment. That said, ratifying the Supremacy Clause and …

Mother Of Exiles: Hospitality & Comprehensive Immigration Reform, Ana M. Rodriguez

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

This article examines the historical pattern of denying immigration in the U.S. on moral and supposedly Christian grounds. Although it is reasonable that no nation is duty-bound to welcome every foreigner and provide the same benefits afforded those with full citizenship, this article contends that a genuinely Christian response demands the biblical core value of hospitality to others. Indeed, xenophobia is the antithesis of hospitality and cannot be supported by a faithful, exegetical interpretation of the Christian Bible. It should be noted that this article does not propose the emergence of an American theocracy; however, hospitality-based dialogue and humanitarian principles …

The Immigration Court System: Unconstitutionality At The Hands Of The Executive To Push Nativism, Chloe Wigul

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

The United States’ immigration court system is located within the U.S. Department of Justice’s Executive Office for Immigration Review and operated under the power of the attorney general. Consequently, the attorney general can review and overrule decisions made by the Board of Immigration Appeals, the immigration appellate body. If the attorney general uses this authority, his decision cannot be reconsidered, and his opinion becomes precedent. Immigration courts are unique in that no other court system is located within or controlled by the executive branch. Focusing on key historical eras, this Comment compares the development of immigration law and policy with …

Table Of Contents

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents

Hernández V. Mesa: A Case For A More Meaningful Partnership With The Inter-American Commission On Human Rights, Peyton Jacobsen

Seattle University Law Review

Through an in-depth examination of Hernández, the Inter-American Human Rights System, and the success of Mexico’s partnership with said system, this Note will make a case for embracing human rights bodies— specifically, the Inter-American System on Human Rights—as an appropriate and necessary check on the structures that form the United States government. Part I will look closely at the reasoning and judicially created doctrine that guided the decision in Hernández, with the goal of providing a better understanding of the complicated path through the courts that led to a seemingly straightforward yet unsatisfying result. Part II will illustrate the scope …

The Emerging Lessons Of Trump V. Hawaii, Shalini Bhargava Ray

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In the years since the Supreme Court decided Trump v. Hawaii, federal district courts have adjudicated dozens of rights-based challenges to executive action in immigration law. Plaintiffs, including U.S. citizens, civil rights organizations, and immigrants themselves, have alleged violations of the First Amendment and the equal protection component of the Due Process Clause with some regularity based on President Trump’s animus toward immigrants. This Article assesses Hawaii’s impact on these challenges to immigration policy, and it offers two observations. First, Hawaii has amplified federal courts’ practice of privileging administrative law claims over constitutional ones. For example, courts considering …

Other Lands And Other Skies: Birthright Citizenship And Self-Government In Unincorporated Territories, John Vlahoplus

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Won't You Be My Neighbor: Meza-Rodriguez, The Second Amendment, And The Constitutional Rights Of Noncitizens, Blair E. Wessels

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Finding The Forum That Fits: Child Immigrants And Fair Process, Lenni Benson

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Bordering The Constitution, Constituting The Border, Efrat Arbel

All Faculty Publications

It is an established principle in Canadian law that refugees present at or within Canada’s borders are entitled to basic constitutional protection. Where precisely these borders lie, however, is far from clear. In this article, I examine the Canadian border as a site in which to study the constitutional entitlements of refugees. Through an analysis of the Multiple Borders Strategy (MBS) – a broad strategy that re-charts Canada’s borders for the purposes of enhanced migration regulation – I point to a basic tension at play in the border as site. I argue that the MBS imagines and enacts the border …

When Immigrants Speak: The Precarious Status Of Non-Citizen Speech Under The First Amendment, Michael Kagan

Scholarly Works

The legal protection of free speech for immigrants in the United States is surprisingly limited, and it may be under more threat than is commonly understood. Although many unauthorized immigrants have become politically active in campaigning for immigration reform, their ability to speak out publicly may depend more on political discretion than on the Constitutional protections that we normally take for granted. Potential threats to immigrant free speech may be seen in three areas of law. First, a broad claim has been made by the Department of Justice that immigrants who have not been legally admitted to the country have …

Mandatory Immigration Detention For U.S. Crimes: The Noncitizen Presumption Of Dangerousness, Mark Noferi

Mark L Noferi

Evolving Contours Of Immigration Federalism: The Case Of Migrant Children, Elizabeth Keyes

Elizabeth Keyes

In a unique corner of immigration law, a significant reallocation of power over immigration has been occurring with little fanfare. States play a dramatic immigration gatekeeping role in the process for providing protection to immigrant youth, like many of the Central American children who sought entry to the United States in the 2014 border “surge.” This article closely examines the history of this Special Immigrant Juvenile Status provision, enacted in 1990, which authorized a vital state role in providing access to an immigration benefit. The article traces the series of shifts in allocation of power between the federal government and …

The Ciudades Modelo Project: Testing The Legality Of Paul Romer’S Charter Cities Concept By Analyzing The Constitutionality Of The Honduran Zones For Employment And Economic Development, Michael R. Miller

Michael R Miller

Over the last several years, the Honduran government has been aggressively advancing a "model cities" project that it argues will provide options for its citizens to escape the extreme violence in their country without migrating to the U.S. The model cities, which are formally called "Zones for Employment and Economic Development" ("ZEDEs"), are purported to be autonomously governed areas that will attract foreign investment and compete for residents by establishing safer communities and better managed institutions governed by the rule of law.

The ZEDEs trace their origin to a concept formulated by development economist Paul Romer, who proposed the idea …

Immigrants Unshackled: The Unconstitutional Use Of Indiscriminate Restraints, Fatma E. Marouf

Fatma E Marouf

This Article challenges the constitutionality of indiscriminately restraining civil immigration detainees during removal proceedings. Not only are immigration detainees routinely placed in handcuffs, leg irons, and belly chains without any individualized determination of the need for restraints, but Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the prosecuting party, makes the decisions about the use of restraints, rather than the judge. After examining the rationale for the well-established prohibition against the indiscriminate use of restraints during criminal and civil jury trials, and discussing how some courts have extended this rationale to bench trials, this Article contends that ICE’s practice violates substantive and procedural …

Criminal Court, New York County, People V. Dejesus, Justin Goldberg

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Transgender Inpportunity And Inequality: Evaluating The Crossroads Between Immigration And Transgender Individuals, Alexandra Caggiano

Seattle University Law Review

Despite being married to a U.S. citizen, non-citizen transgender individuals and non-citizen spouses married to transgender U.S. citizens still face deportation today due to current immigration policies. When forced to return to their home countries, transgender individuals are likely to encounter violence from those who perpetuate hate towards transgender and gender non-conforming individuals. Instead of protecting these individuals, the United States continues to send people back to their native countries solely because those individuals do not fall within the narrowly constructed definition of marriage some states use that is legally recognized by federal courts. Transgender individuals receive disparate treatment as …

Freedmen And Day Laborers: Why Enforcement Matters, Raja Raghunath

Raja Raghunath

As the one hundred and fiftieth anniversary of Emancipation approaches, there is a cautionary lesson for modern workers from the period that followed the abolition of chattel slavery. Reconstruction, after the Civil War, was the moment when the promise of universal liberty to work first became part of the American state’s covenant with its people. But this promise was quickly lost, as the rights that the federal government extended to the freed slaves – the freedmen – were contested and eventually nullified by vehement opposition in the working fields and cities of the South. In this sense, workers’ rights were …

Montes-Lopez V. Holder: Applying Eldridge To Ensure A Per Se Right To Counsel For Indigent Immigrants In Removal Proceedings, Soulmaz Taghavi

Soulmaz Taghavi

Part I of this Comment reviews the historical and current state of procedural due process and its role in Immigration Law, specifically removal proceedings. Part II extends certain legal arguments in the opinion of Montes-Lopez v. Holder, which held among divided federal Circuit Courts that an immigrant in removal proceedings has a statutory and constitutional right to appointed counsel. Last, Part III demonstrates how a non-citizen in deportation hearing has a per se right to counsel outlined by the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and brought to life by the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause.

The Immigration Detention Risk Assessment, Mark Noferi, Robert Koulish

Mark L Noferi

In early 2013, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) deployed nationwide a new automated risk assessment tool to help determine whether to detain or release noncitizens pending their deportation proceedings. Adapted from similar evidence-based criminal justice reforms that have reduced pretrial detention, ICE’s initiative now represents the largest pre-hearing risk assessment experiment in U.S. history—potentially impacting over 400,000 individuals per year. However, to date little information has been released regarding the risk assessment algorithm, processes, and outcomes.

This article provides the first comprehensive examination of ICE’s risk assessment initiative, based on public access to ICE methodology and outcomes as a …

Equal Protection: Immigrants' Access To Healthcare And Welfare Benefits, Mel Cousins

Mel Cousins

The adoption of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (hereinafter “PRWORA”) led to considerable litigation over immigrants’ rights to welfare benefits and access to health care. The approaches adopted by different courts (both federal and state) diverged significantly based on the various statutory schemes involved as well as distinct approaches to equal protection. However, no “on point” cases have reached the United States Supreme Court, so the “correct” approach remains unclear. Following the fiscal crisis of 2008, several states moved for increased exclusion of certain immigrants residing in the country legally from state healthcare or welfare …

Equal Protection, Immigrants And Access To Health Care And Welfare Benefits – A 2014 Update, Mel Cousins

Mel Cousins

The introduction of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) led to considerable litigation on the rights of immigrants to welfare benefits and access to health care. There was significant divergence between the approaches adopted by the different courts (both federal and State) based, in part, on the different statutory schemes involved but also on different approaches to equal protection. However, none of the cases reached the Supreme Court so the ‘correct’ approach remained unclarified. In response to the Great Recession and subsequent budget crises, several States have again excluded certain legal immigrants from the scope …

“Branded To Drive: Obstacle Preemption Of North Carolina Driver’S Licenses For Daca Grantees”, Tung Sing Wong Mr.

Tung Sing Wong Mr.

The article focuses on whether driver’s licenses that North Carolina recently issued to Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) grantees are obstacle preempted. DACA grantees do not have legal status, but are protected from removal. North Carolina issued new driver’s licenses that publicize the immigration status of DACA grantees. The issue is whether a state can publish the immigration status of individuals who do not have legal status in the U.S., but are nonetheless protected from removal. Additionally, the article explores how the interaction of the North Carolina licenses with 287(g), Secured Communities, and recent state law such as Arizona's …

The Localization Of Federal Immigration Law -- A "Show Me Your Papers" Paper, J. Gabriel Castro

J. Gabriel Castro

This paper discusses the policy concerns behind state enforcement of federal immigration law, the substance of these laws, and their future following the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Arizona. It will also cover what needs to be done for the laws to be repudiated or applied more successfully. Part II will deal with the historical development behind the Supreme Court’s treatment of authority over immigration control and regulation. Part III discusses the reasoning behind the outcome of the case determining the validity of SB 1070, Arizona v. United States. Finally, part IV will look to the future of …

The Normative & Historical Cases For Proportional Deportation, Angela M. Banks

Faculty Publications

Is citizenship status a legitimate basis for allocating rights in the United States?

In immigration law the right to remain in the United States is significantly tied to citizenship status. Citizens have an absolutely secure right to remain in the United States regardless of their actions. Noncitizens’ right to remain is less secure because they can be deported if convicted of specific criminal offenses. This Article contends that citizenship is not a legitimate basis for allocating the right to remain. This Article offers normative and historical arguments for a right to remain for noncitizens. This right should be granted to …

Foreign In A Domestic Sense: American Samoa And The Last U.S. Nationals, Sean Morrison

Sean Morrison

Citizenship is part of the foundation of being American. Yet the United States treats some of its own as second class citizens. Deep in the South Pacific, forgotten amidst the vast ocean and coconuts, is a small series of islands that represent the only U.S. jurisdiction below the Equator. American Samoa remains the last American territory that does not recognize its inhabitants as citizens. For more than a century, American Samoans have fought American wars, pledged allegiance to the American flag, and played a significant amount of American football, yet are categorized as U.S. nationals rather than citizens.

Recently, some …

Social Protection Afforded To Irregular Migrant Workers: Thoughts On International Norms, The Southern African Development Community, Botswana And South Africa, Bruno Ps Van Eck, Felicia Snyman

Bruno PS Van Eck

The majority of migrant workers target those countries in southern Africa that have stronger economies. Irregular migrants are in a particularly vulnerable position, and this article discusses the protection that this category of persons may expect to experience in the southern African region. The authors recommend that the broad notion of “social protection”, rather than the narrower concept “social security” should be emphasized. International, continental and regional instruments providing protection to irregular migrants are traversed and the constitutional and legislative frameworks in relation to social protection in Botswana and South Africa are compared. The article concludes that there are significant …

Immigration, Sovereignty, And The Constitution Of Foreignness, Matthew Lindsay

All Faculty Scholarship

It is a central premise of modern American immigration law that immigrants, by virtue of their non-citizenship, are properly subject to an extra-constitutional regulatory authority that is inherent in national sovereignty and buffered against judicial review. The Supreme Court first posited this constitutionally exceptional authority, which is commonly known as the “plenary power doctrine,” in the 1889 Chinese Exclusion Case. There, the Court reconstructed the federal immigration power from a form of commercial regulation rooted in Congress’s commerce power, to an instrument of national self-defense against invading hordes of economically and racially degraded foreigners.

Today, generations after the United States …

Teaching The U.S. V. Arizona Immigration Law Case, Corey A. Ciocchetti

Corey A Ciocchetti

Arizona v. U.S. was one of the most anticipated decisions of the Supreme Court's October 2011 term. The case pits the state of Arizona and its immigration policy of "attrition through enforcement" against a much less aggressive federal immigration policy under President Obama.

These slides help tell the story and can be used to teach the case as well as important constitutional law issues such as: (1) enumerated powers, (2) preemption, (3) federalism, (4) state sovereignty and more.