Law Commons^™

The Myth Of The Great Writ, Leah M. Litman

Articles

Habeas corpus is known as the “Great Writ” because it supposedly protects individual liberty against government overreach and guards against wrongful detentions. This idea shapes habeas doctrine, federal courts theories, and habeas-reform proposals.

It is also incomplete. While the writ has sometimes protected individual liberty, it has also served as a vehicle for the legitimation of excesses of governmental power. A more complete picture of the writ emerges when one considers traditionally neglected areas of public law that are often treated as distinct—the law of slavery and freedom, Native American affairs, and immigration. There, habeas has empowered abusive exercises of …

Racial Purges, Robert L. Tsai

Michigan Law Review

Review of Beth Lew-Williams' The Chinese Must Go: Violence, Exclusion, and the Making of the Alien in America.

States Taking Charge: Examining The Role Of Race, Party Affliation, And Preemption In The Development Of In-State Tuition Laws For Undocumented Immigrant Students , Stephen L. Nelson, Jennifer L. Robinson, Kara Hetrick Glaubitz

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

Part I of this Article details both the legislative and legal history of undocumented immigrants’ access to education in the United States. Part II then describes the current U.S. state laws in effect regarding in-state tuition for undocumented immigrant students at state-funded colleges and universities. Part III further explores the development of laws and policies with a keen focus on potential correlations between (1) the racial composition of state legislatures and the passage of in-state tuition policies; (2) the race of governors and the passage of in-state tuition policies; (3) partisan composition of state legislatures and the passage of in-state …

International Law-Effect Of Philippine Independence On Filipino Citizens Resident In The United States, Donald S. Leeper S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Appellant was born in the Philippine Islands in 1910 and lawfully entered the Territory of Hawaii in 1930, where he has resided ever since. In 1949 appellant applied for the issuance of a United States passport. Application was denied on the ground that the appellant became an alien under the Presidential Proclamation of Philippine Independence of July 4, 1946, and hence was not entitled to a passport. Appellant petitioned to have his status declared to be that of a national of the United States. This was resisted on the ground that the intention of the United States Government was to …