Law Commons^™

Federalism And The Disappearing Equal Protection Rights Of Immigrants, Kevin R. Johnson

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

Jenny-Brooke Condon’s article The Preempting of Equal Protection for Immigrants? analyzes important issues surrounding the constitutional rights of immigrants. Professor Condon in essence contends that the current legislative, executive, and scholarly focus on the distribution of immigration power between the state and federal governments has undermined the Equal Protection rights of legal immigrants in the United States. Despite the contentious national debates over immigration reform, immigrants’ rights have generally been of secondary concern in contemporary immigration scholarship, which is now dominated by analysis of immigration federalism.

Professor Condon undoubtedly is correct that we should not lose sight of the rights …

The Preempting Of Equal Protection For Immigrants?, Jenny-Brooke Condon

Washington and Lee Law Review

Recent debates about immigration have focused overwhelmingly on unauthorized migration and the respective roles of the federal and state governments in enforcing immigration law. But that emphasis in law and theory has obscured a critical civil rights question of our time: what measure of equality is due to those with the opportunity to abide by the rules of entry, who are now lawfully present within the United States? Although the United States Supreme Court recognized decades ago that lawfully present migrants are a discrete and insular minority entitled to heightened judicial protection under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth …

The Shibboleth Of Discretion: The Discretion, Identity, And Persecution Paradigm In American And Australian Lgbt Asylum Claims, Heather Kolinsky

Scholarly Articles

While the High Court in Australia has made it clear that discretion is not to be considered when determining if an applicant may avoid persecution upon returning home, there are concerns that discretion persists in the decision-making process with respect to discrediting identity claims. In addition, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom handed down a retooled formulation of discretion, which once again created subcategories of applicants and suggested discretion is an appropriate consideration so long as it is not exercised out of a fear of persecution. This discussion will focus on a comparison of the evolution of LGBT asylum …