Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Kazarian V. United States Citizenship And Immigration Services: Clarifying “Extraordinary Ability” Visa Qualifications, Jaimie Bombard
Kazarian V. United States Citizenship And Immigration Services: Clarifying “Extraordinary Ability” Visa Qualifications, Jaimie Bombard
Golden Gate University Law Review
In 2007, Dr. Poghos Kazarian appealed the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service’s denial of his application for an “extraordinary ability” visa. Prior to Kazarian v. US Citizenship & Immigration Services, the Ninth Circuit had never addressed the issue of how the statutory and regulatory requirements for the “extraordinary ability” visa should be interpreted. The Kazarian court determined that the regulations outlining the evidence sufficient to qualify for the “extraordinary ability” classification were extremely restrictive. The court then concluded that, since Dr. Kazarian had presented only two of the three types of evidence required to meet the eligibility criteria, the …
Rodriguez V. Hayes: Government Accountability For Immigrants In Prolonged Detention, Otis Carl Landerholm
Rodriguez V. Hayes: Government Accountability For Immigrants In Prolonged Detention, Otis Carl Landerholm
Golden Gate University Law Review
United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) chooses to keep many immigrants incarcerated while they await the results of their hearings before immigration judges, appeals to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), or second appeals to the federal courts of appeals. Starting with Zadvydas v. Davis in 2001, federal courts have been facing the question of whether such lengthy detentions are permissible under either the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) or the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court in Zadvydas held that indefinite detention “would raise serious constitutional concerns” and decided to construe the prolonged-detention statute at issue “to contain …
Asylum For A Minor Child Of Persecuted Parents In Zhang V. Gonzales, Roxana M. Smith
Asylum For A Minor Child Of Persecuted Parents In Zhang V. Gonzales, Roxana M. Smith
Golden Gate University Law Review
In Zhang v. Gonzales, the Ninth Circuit considered for the first time whether an unaccompanied minor child of a parent who was forcibly sterilized should be automatically eligible to apply for asylum. Deferring to the statutory interpretation adopted by the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA"), the court found against the child. The court's opinion retreated from earlier dictum suggesting that the refugee statute could reasonably be extended to grant automatic eligibility to a child. However, the court went on to hold that the parents' political opinion - in the form of resistance to coercive population controls - could still be …