Law Commons^™

Road To Booker And Beyond: Constitutional Limits On Sentence Enhancements, John Gleeson

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Extradition - Denial Of Asylum - Withholding Deportation - Different Tactics Used By The Attorney General To Deliver Provisional Irish Republican Army Members To The British: Doherty V. United States, 908 F.2d 1108 (2d Cir. 1990), William Roebuck

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Nativism, Terrorism, And Human Rights -- The Global Wrongs Of Reno V. American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, Berta E. Hernández-Truyol

Berta E. Hernández-Truyol

The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee decision (American-Arab or AADC) is the most recent U.S. Supreme Court pronouncement regarding the intersection of immigration regulations and fundamental constitutional rights enjoyed by foreign subjects present within the United States. In American-Arab, the U.S. government commenced deportation proceedings against two legal permanent residents and six temporary visa holders on the basis of an ideological bias: the plaintiffs were alleged to be members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (Popular Front or PFLP) -- a charge all the plaintiffs denied. The Supreme Court's ruling endorsing the legality of the government's deportation actions wholly …

Immigration - Asylum - Deportation - Standards To Be Met By Illegal Aliens Applying For Withholding Of Deportation And Political Asylum, Mendoza Perez V. Ins, 902 F.2d 760 (9th Cir. 1990), Theodosia Gavatides

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Immigration Surveillance, Anil Kalhan

Maryland Law Review

In recent years, immigration enforcement levels have soared, yielding a widely noted increase in the number of noncitizens removed from the United States. Less visible, however, has been an attendant sea change in the underlying nature of immigration governance itself, hastened by new surveillance and dataveillance technologies. Like many other areas of contemporary governance, immigration control has rapidly become an information-centered and technology-driven enterprise. At virtually every stage of the process of migrating or traveling to, from, and within the United States, both noncitizens and U.S. citizens are now subject to collection and analysis of extensive quantities of personal information …

The Challenge Of Seeing Justice Done In Removal Proceedings, Jason A. Cade

Scholarly Works

Prosecutorial discretion is a critical part of the administration of immigration law. This Article considers the work and responsibilities of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) trial attorneys, who thus far have not attracted significant scholarly attention, despite playing a large role in the ground-level implementation of immigration law and policy. The Article makes three main contributions. First, I consider whether ICE attorneys have a duty to help ensure that the removal system achieves justice, rather than indiscriminately seek removal in every case and by any means necessary. As I demonstrate, trial attorneys have concrete obligations derived from statutory provisions, …

The Challenge Of Seeing Justice Done In Removal Proceedings, Jason A. Cade

Scholarly Works

Prosecutorial discretion is a critical part of the administration of immigration law. This Article considers the work and responsibilities of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) trial attorneys, who thus far have not attracted significant scholarly attention, despite playing a large role in the ground-level implementation of immigration law and policy. The Article makes three main contributions. First, I consider whether ICE attorneys have a duty to help ensure that the removal system achieves justice, rather than indiscriminately seek removal in every case and by any means necessary. As I demonstrate, trial attorneys have concrete obligations derived from statutory provisions, …

The Challenge Of Seeing Justice Done In Removal Proceedings, Jason A. Cade

Scholarly Works

Prosecutorial discretion is a critical part of the administration of immigration law. This Article considers the work and responsibilities of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) trial attorneys, who thus far have not attracted significant scholarly attention, despite playing a large role in the ground-level implementation of immigration law and policy. The Article makes three main contributions. First, I consider whether ICE attorneys have a duty to help ensure that the removal system achieves justice, rather than indiscriminately seek removal in every case and by any means necessary. As I demonstrate, trial attorneys have concrete obligations derived from statutory provisions, …

Does The European Convention On Human Rights Protect Refugees From "Safe" Countries?, Kathleen M. Whitney

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Impact Of New Policies Adopted After September 11 On Lawful Permanent Residents Facing Deportation Under The Aedpa And Iirira And The Hope Of Relief Under The Family Reunification Act, Yen H. Trinh

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Humanitarian Protections And The Need For Appointed Counsel For Unaccompanied Immigrant Children Facing Deportation, Ashley Ham Pong

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

The Case Against Separating The Care From The Caregiver: Reuniting Caregivers' Rights And Children's Rights, Pamela Laufer-Ukeles

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Buying Time? False Assumptions About Abusive Appeals, Michael Kagan, Fatma Marouf, Rebecca Gill

Catholic University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Military Commissions In America? Domestic Liberty Implications Of The Military Commissions Act Of 2006, Sean Riordan

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Does The Legal Standard Matter? Empirical Answers To Justice Kennedy’S Questions In Nken V. Holder, Christopher J. Walker

Christopher J. Walker

In response to Fatma Marouf, Michael Kagan & Rebecca Gill, Justice on the Fly: The Danger of Errant Deportations, 75 Ohio St. L.J. 337 (2014).

In Justice on the Fly: The Danger of Errant Deportations, Professors Fatma Marouf, Michael Kagan, and Rebecca Gill take on the ambitious task of answering the empirical questions posed by Justice Kennedy and others in Nken v. Holder with respect to the proper legal standard for judicial stays of removal in the immigration adjudication context. To answer these questions, the authors review, code, and analyze 1,646 cases in all circuits that hear immigration appeals and …

History Repeats Itself: Parallels Between Current-Day Threats To Immigrant Parental Rights And Native American Parental Rights In The Twentieth Century, Vinita B. Andrapalliyal

University of Massachusetts Law Review

Immigrant parents are currently burdened with unique risks to their parental rights, risks that bear little relation to their ability to care for their children. Recent developments in family and immigration law, historical cultural prejudices against non-Western parenting traditions, and poor immigrants’ limited access to the U.S. legal system are largely to blame. This Note explores the inadequacies in our legal system contributing to the struggles of immigrant parents to maintain family unity and connects the current situation to the disproportionate number of terminations of parental rights within the Native American community in the mid-twentieth century. It suggests that a …

The Immigrant "Other": Racialized Identity And The Devaluation Of Immigrant Family Relations, Anita Maddali

Indiana Law Journal

This Article explores how current terminations of undocumented immigrants’ parental rights are reminiscent of historical practices that removed early immigrant and Native American children from their parents in an attempt to cultivate an Anglo-American national identity. Today, children are separated from their families when courts terminate the rights of parents who have been, or who face, deportation. Often, biases toward undocumented parents affect determinations concerning parental fitness in a manner that, while different, reaps the same results as the removal of children from their families over a century ago. This Article examines cases in which courts terminated the parental rights …

Immigration Is Different: Why Congress Should Guarantee Access To Counsel In All Immigration Matters, Careen Shannon

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

This article represents a pipe dream. It envisions an America where no one would be detained, deported, and exiled without the opportunity to meaningfully challenge the grounds for such drastic action against them. Specifically, it envisions an America in which Congress would act in the interest of justice to ensure that foreign nationals held in immigration detention-no, let's call it what it is: prison-while awaiting the opportunity to challenge removability before an Immigration Judge were guaranteed the right to counsel. Similarly, it imagines that even in a time of fiscal crisis and political dysfunction, a Congress that enacts some type …

"But My Attorney Didn't Tell Me I'D Be Deported!"--The Retroactivity Of Padilla, Tara M. Breslawski

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

“Are We There Yet?” Immigration Reform For The Best Interest Of Children Left Behind, Lynne Marie Kohm, Keila Molina

Lynne Marie Kohm

This article illustrates several important concerns that are at work for immigrating families and their children, while presenting options for federal and state government action to implement public policies for the protection of the best interests of children whose families are involved in immigration proceedings, particularly when children are left behind by deported parents. Part I considers the intersection of family law with federal immigration law and policy and its impact on the lives of children. Part II details the dilemma of a lack of federal planning for children left behind after parents are detained or deported; these are incredibly …

Learning From The Past: Why Termination Of A Non-Citizen Parent's Rights Should Not Be Based On The Child's Best Interest, Stacy Byrd

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Meditation On Moncrieffe: On Marijuana, Misdemeanants, And Migration, Victor C. Romero

Journal Articles

This essay is a brief meditation on the immigration schizophrenia in our law and legal culture through the lens of the Supreme Court’s latest statement on immigration and crime, Moncrieffe v. Holder. While hailed as a “common sense” decision, Moncrieffe is a rather narrow ruling that does little to change the law regarding aggravated felonies or the ways in which class and citizenship play into the enforcement of minor drug crimes and their deportation consequences. Despite broad agreement on the Court, the Moncrieffe opinion still leaves the discretion to deport minor state drug offenders in the hands of the federal …

The Rise Of Speed Deportation And The Role Of Discretion, Shoba S. Wadhia

Journal Articles

In 2013, the majority of people deported never saw a courtroom or immigration judge. Instead, they were quickly removed by the Department of Homeland Security via one of several procedures collectively referred to as “speed deportation.” The policy goals of speed deportation are economic; these processes save government resources from being spent on procedural safeguards such as a trial attorney, immigration judge, and a fundamentally fair hearing. Higher deportation numbers may also benefit the image the government seeks to portray to policymakers who support amplified immigration enforcement. However, the human consequences of speed deportation are significant and can result in …

Shattering The One-Way Mirror: Discovery In Immigration Court, Geoffrey Heeren

Articles

No abstract provided.

Buying Time? False Assumptions About Abusive Appeals, Michael Kagan, Fatma Marouf, Rebecca Gill

Scholarly Works

The federal government has expressed fear that immigrants abuse the appellate process to delay their deportations by filing meritless petitions for review with the federal courts. Some courts have responded to these concerns by imposing stricter standards for issuing stays of removal, so that the government can more easily deport petitioners even while their appeals remain pending. The risk with this approach is that immigrants who ultimately prevail may be erroneously deported. What is often overlooked is that the potential for abuse is really a function of time, with longer appeals posing a greater threat to immigration enforcement. This study …

Justice On The Fly: The Danger Of Errant Deportations, Fatma Marouf, Michael Kagan, Rebecca Gill

Scholarly Works

The government may deport an immigrant appealing a deportation order in federal court even before the court rules on the case, unless the court issues a stay of removal. In its 2009 decision in Nken v. Holder, the Supreme Court clarified that the legal standard for stays of removal is the same test courts use for preliminary injunctions. Yet Justice Kennedy expressed frustration that the Court had little data to inform its decision. The Court will likely need to revisit this issue, as doubts cloud the meaning of Nken’s main holdings, in part because the government misled the …