Law Commons^™

El Gran Ausente De Las Discusiones Laborales: La Migración, Jennifer Gordon

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Padilla V. Kentucky: Sound And Fury, Or Transformative Impact, Steven Zeidman

Fordham Urban Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Realizing Padilla’S Promise: Ensuring Noncitizen Defendants Are Advised Of The Immigration Consequences Of A Criminal Conviction, Yolanda Vàzquez

Fordham Urban Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Conference Report: Padilla And The Future Of The Defense Function, Joel M. Schumm

Fordham Urban Law Journal

No abstract provided.

You Are The Last Lawyer They Will Ever See Before Exile: Padilla V. Kentucky And One Indigent Defender Office's Account Of Creating A Systematic Approach To Providing Immigration Advice In Times Of Tight Budgets And High Caseloads, Carlos J. Martinez, George C. Palaidis, Sarah Wood Borak

Fordham Urban Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Tortured Language: Lawful Permanent Residents And The 212(H) Waiver, Julianne Lee

Fordham Law Review

Recent amendments to the Immigration and Nationality Act have greatly expanded the grounds for removal of lawful permanent residents (LPRs) and, at the same time, constricted judicial review of agency decisions to deport immigrants. Language added to the 212(h) waiver of inadmissibility has increased the number of LPRs that are now ineligible for relief from removal by barring certain LPRs from applying for a waiver if, since the date of their admission, they have committed an aggravated felony or have failed to accrue seven years of continuous presence. The controversy discussed in this Note stems from differing interpretations of this …

Enforcing Immigration Equity, Jason A. Cade

Fordham Law Review

Congressional amendments to the immigration code in the 1990s significantly broadened grounds for removal while nearly eradicating opportunities for discretionary relief. The result has been a radical transformation of immigration law. In particular, the constriction of equitable discretion as an adjudicative tool has vested a new and critical responsibility in enforcement officials to implement rigid immigration rules in a normatively defensible way, primarily through the use of prosecutorial discretion. This Article contextualizes recent executive enforcement actions within this scheme and argues that the Obama Administration’s targeted use of limited enforcement resources and implementation of initiatives such as Deferred Action for …

Involuntary Return And The “Found In” Clause Of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(A): An Immigration Conundrum, Matthew J. Geyer

Fordham Law Review

Illegal reentry into the United States by previously removed aliens is a major problem that has risen steadily in recent years. 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) punishes such aliens. Specifically, § 1326(a) provides for criminal fines or imprisonment (or both) of any previously removed alien who enters, attempts to enter, or is “found in” the United States at any time after his or her initial removal.

What does it mean to be “found in” the United States in violation of § 1326(a)? The easy case is when a previously removed alien surreptitiously reenters the United States illegally, remains in the United …

There And Back, Now And Then: Iirira’S Retroactivity And The Normalization Of Judicial Review In Immigration Law, Austen Ishii

Fordham Law Review

The U.S. Supreme Court has a long tradition of treating immigration law as “exceptional,” deferring to Congress and executive agencies when determining the scope of various immigration laws. The Court’s refusal to subject immigration statutes to the ordinary level of judicial review has left immigrants even more susceptible to the effects of anti-immigrant legislation.

When the Court decided Fernandez-Vargas v. Gonzales in 2006 it increased the scope of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA) by allowing portions of the statute to be applied to immigrants who had reentered the United States prior to its effective …

Tensions In Rhetoric And Reality At The Intersection Of Work And Immigration, Jennifer Gordon

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Reflections On Professor Romero’S Insight On The Decriminalization Of Border Crossings, Won Kidane

Fordham Urban Law Journal

Professor Romero proposes that unauthorized border crossings must be decriminalized. He advances several notable reasons why such a measure is warranted. Kidane offers his own reflections in the following three parts. Part I puts the doctrinal dilemma between criminalization and decriminalization in perspective. Part II evaluates Professor Romero’s argument in favor of decriminalization. And the Conclusion offers final thoughts.

"Sanctuary Cities" And Local Citizenship, Rose Cuison Villazor

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This article explores the ways in which sanctuary laws illustrate the tensions between national and local citizenship, and specifically examines the ways in which "sanctuary cities" have constructed membership for undocumented immigrants located within their jurisdictions.

The Constitutional Dimension Of Immigration Federalism, Clare Huntington

Faculty Scholarship

Although the federal government is traditionally understood to enjoy exclusive authority over immigration, states and localities are increasingly asserting a role in this field. This development has sparked vigorous debate on the propriety of such involvement, but the debate is predicated on a misunderstanding of the nature of federal exclusivity. Challenging the conventional wisdom that the Constitution precludes a meaningful role for state and local involvement in immigration.

This Article argues that the Constitution allows immigration authority to be shared among levels of government. After establishing the correctness of this view of immigration authority, this Article argues that the constitutionality …

"Soft Immutability" And "Imputed Gay Identity": Recent Developments In Transgender And Sexual-Orientation-Based Asylum Law, Joseph Landau

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This Article surveys the law of LGBT asylum as it has developed over the past fifteen years, first, with the landmark case of Matter of Toboso-Alfonso, which recognized homosexuality as a "particular social group"; second, with the Ninth Circuit's recent cases adopting a soft immutability standard of identity and expanding asylum protection to transgender individuals; and third, with a discussion of the "particular social group" analysis as it applies to transgender asylum seekers and the emergence of the "imputed gay identity" category as an alternative basis for relief for those litigants who do not identify as gay or lesbian but …

Uncharted Territory: Choosing An Effective Approach In Transgender-Based Asylum Claims, Victoria Neilson

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This Article focuses on individuals who believe that they are born with the wrong anatomical sex and who suffer persecution as a result of their transgender identity. The Article discusses existing precedent in the context of transgender asylum seekers and suggests possible theories for framing successful transgender asylum claims.

"One Manner Of Law": The Supreme Court, Stare Decisis And The Immigration Law Plenary Power Doctrine, Anne E. Pettit

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This note examines the extreme deference the Court gives to Congress in the realm of immigration legislation. The author argues that, in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, the Supreme Court's analysis of stare decisis, precedent and the rule of law provides a strikingly effective paradigm through which to view the history of Supreme Court immigration rulings. Viewed through the Court's own analysis of its power to make and revise precedent decisions, the immigration plenary power doctrine's jurisprudential shortcomings become more evident and the arguments to overturn the doctrine become more powerful. This Note concludes that no principled constitutional …

Immigration Law- Exclusionary Rule- If The Exclusionary Rule Question Is Reached, The Civil Nature Of A Deportation Proceeding May Preclude Its Application, Diane M. Peress

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This Case Note addresses questions concerning the exclusionary rule in deportation proceedings. Examining the Ninth Circuit's analysis in Cuevas- Ortega v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, this case note admits that though the exclusionary rule is a judicially created remedy it may still be required in deportation proceedings.