Law Commons^™

“And Ain’T I A Woman?”: Feminism, Immigrant Caregivers, And New Frontiers For Equality, Shirley Lin Esq.

Shirley Lin Esq.

Part I draws from a body of feminist political and social science theories regarding social reproduction to assess the situation of immigrant domestic workers and their recent efforts to claim inclusion in workplace laws and protections. It locates the increasingly carceral dynamics that are expressed in the law and in state infrastructure that continually undermine immigrant women’s economic and social stability. Part II examines the importance of immigrant women workers in the United States and their disproportionate share in the “feminization” of low-wage work at a time when society’s critical social-reproductive work has been shifted to them. Part III analyzes …

Abandoning The Status Quo: Towards Uniform Application Of Special Immigrant Juvenile Status, Gregory Catangay

Gregory Catangay

The accompanying Article identifies and analyzes the causes of unequal application of the Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) program and argues for a federal takeover of the program. The Article highlights the current immigration crisis and the plight of unaccompanied minors seeking a better life in the United States. These minors may be eligible for permanent legal status in the United States through the SIJS program. Although SIJS is a federal remedy, variations in state law and interpretation of SIJS requirements exclude eligible minors.

In order to be eligible for the SIJS program, a state trial court must find that …

Immigrants Unshackled: The Unconstitutional Use Of Indiscriminate Restraints, Fatma E. Marouf

Fatma E Marouf

This Article challenges the constitutionality of indiscriminately restraining civil immigration detainees during removal proceedings. Not only are immigration detainees routinely placed in handcuffs, leg irons, and belly chains without any individualized determination of the need for restraints, but Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the prosecuting party, makes the decisions about the use of restraints, rather than the judge. After examining the rationale for the well-established prohibition against the indiscriminate use of restraints during criminal and civil jury trials, and discussing how some courts have extended this rationale to bench trials, this Article contends that ICE’s practice violates substantive and procedural …

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 …

Montes-Lopez V. Holder: Applying Eldridge To Ensure A Per Se Right To Counsel For Indigent Immigrants In Removal Proceedings, Soulmaz Taghavi

Soulmaz Taghavi

Part I of this Comment reviews the historical and current state of procedural due process and its role in Immigration Law, specifically removal proceedings. Part II extends certain legal arguments in the opinion of Montes-Lopez v. Holder, which held among divided federal Circuit Courts that an immigrant in removal proceedings has a statutory and constitutional right to appointed counsel. Last, Part III demonstrates how a non-citizen in deportation hearing has a per se right to counsel outlined by the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and brought to life by the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause.

“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 …

Making Civil Immigration Detention “Civil,” And Examining The Emerging U.S. Civil Detention Paradigm, Mark Noferi

Mark L Noferi

In 2009, the Obama Administration began to reform its sprawling immigration detention system by asking the question, “How do we make civil detention civil?” Five years later, after opening an explicitly-named “civil detention center” in Texas to public criticism from both sides, the Administration’s efforts have stalled. But its reforms, even if fully implemented, would still resemble lower-security criminal jails.

This symposium article is the first to comprehensively examine the Administration’s efforts to implement “truly civil” immigration detention, through new standards, improved conditions, and greater oversight. It does so by undertaking the first descriptive comparison of the U.S.’s two largest …

Increase Quota, Invite Opportunities, Improve Economy: An Examination Of The Educational And Employment Crisis Of Undocumented Immigrants And Individuals From Abroad, Brittany Fink

Brittany Fink

No abstract provided.

Increase Quota, Invite Opportunities, Improve Economy: An Examination Of The Educational And Employment Crisis Of Undocumented Immigrants And Individuals From Abroad, Brittany Fink

Brittany Fink

No abstract provided.

“Branded To Drive: Obstacle Preemption Of North Carolina Driver’S Licenses For Daca Grantees”, Tung Sing Wong Mr.

Tung Sing Wong Mr.

The article focuses on whether driver’s licenses that North Carolina recently issued to Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) grantees are obstacle preempted. DACA grantees do not have legal status, but are protected from removal. North Carolina issued new driver’s licenses that publicize the immigration status of DACA grantees. The issue is whether a state can publish the immigration status of individuals who do not have legal status in the U.S., but are nonetheless protected from removal. Additionally, the article explores how the interaction of the North Carolina licenses with 287(g), Secured Communities, and recent state law such as Arizona's …

"Health Care For All:" The Gap Between Rhetoric And Reality In The Affordable Care Act, Vinita Andrapalliyal

Vinita Andrapalliyal

The rhetoric of “universal health care” and “health care for all” that pervaded the health care debate which culminated in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA)’s passage. However, the ACA offers reduced to no protections for certain noncitizen groups, specifically: 1) recently-arrived legal permanent residents, 2) nonimmigrants, and 3) the undocumented. This Article explores how the Act fails to ensure “health care for all,” demonstrates the gap between rhetoric and reality by parsing the ACA’s legislative history, and posits reasons for the gap. The ACA’s legislative history suggests that legislators’ biases towards these noncitizen groups, particularly with respect …

The Case For Mexican Asylum Seekers Fleeing Cartel Violence, Perry B. Nava

Perry B Nava

The number of Mexican immigrants filing for asylum in the United States is on the rise as cartel violence affects more people each year. The perceived increase in cartel-related, violent crime is displacing people similar to how a war forces displaced refugees out of a country; but the United States is not accepting a great majority of the applications for asylum. This paper explores the more broadly applicable law that protects persecuted people; some of the issues that have simultaneously contributed to increased migration to the United States and aggressive expansion by the drug cartels; the result of the application …

U.S. Asylum Law As A Path To Religious Persecution, Jack C. Dolance Ii

Jack C Dolance II

U.S. asylum law protects against persecution “on account of . . . religion.” But must the law protect a non-believer seeking religious asylum in the United States? Many may instinctively answer “no,” for a non-believer is by most definitions not “religious.” Such a response misses the mark however — at least in the context of U.S. asylum law, which is subject to the First Amendment. The protection of religious liberty enshrined in the First Amendment embodies freedom from persecution on account of one’s “religion” — in whatever form that religion may take. In the asylum context, then, “religion” must be …

Reclassifying "Terrorists" As Victims: Integrating Terrorism Analysis Into The Particular Social Group Framework Of Asylum, Emily Naser-Hall

Emily Naser-Hall

After the September 11th terrorist attacks at the hands of al-Qaeda operatives who slipped through the cracks of the US immigration system, immigration and asylum law became increasingly focused on ensuring that potential terrorists are not allowed into the United States. The USA PATRIOT Act and its subsequent legislation created what has become an unyielding bar to admission for any individual who is a member of a terrorist organization or who has committed terrorist activities. While the terrorism bar developed in response to real or perceived threats to US national security and has recently regained public light with the trial …

Reclassifying "Terrorists" As Victims: Integrating Terrorism Analysis Into The Particular Social Group Framework Of Asylum, Emily Naser-Hall

Emily Naser-Hall

No abstract provided.

Revisiting The Meaning Of Marriage: Immigration For Same-Sex Spouses In A Post-Windsor World, Scott Titshaw

Scott Titshaw

When the Supreme Court struck down Section 3 of DOMA in United States v. Windsor, it eliminated a categorical barrier to immigration for thousands of LGBT families. Yet Windsor was not an immigration case, and the Court’s opinion did not address at least three resulting immigration questions: What if a same-sex couple legally marries in one jurisdiction but resides in a state that does not recognize the marriage? What if the couple is in a legally-recognized “civil union” or “registered partnership”? Will children born to spouses or registered partners in same-sex couples be recognized as “born in wedlock” for immigration …

Teaching The U.S. V. Arizona Immigration Law Case, Corey A. Ciocchetti

Corey A Ciocchetti

Arizona v. U.S. was one of the most anticipated decisions of the Supreme Court's October 2011 term. The case pits the state of Arizona and its immigration policy of "attrition through enforcement" against a much less aggressive federal immigration policy under President Obama.

These slides help tell the story and can be used to teach the case as well as important constitutional law issues such as: (1) enumerated powers, (2) preemption, (3) federalism, (4) state sovereignty and more.

The Xenophobic Fourth Amendment: How Racism Has Influenced The Discriminatory Application Of The Fourth Amendment To Non-Citizens, Steven T. Sacco Mr.

Steven T. Sacco Mr.

This article illustrates how racism continues to color judge-made immigration law in the United States, but specifically with respect to federal jurisprudential analysis and application of the right to freedom from unreasonable search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment as it is applied to non-citizens residing in the United States. The result is a different set of rules and reduced freedoms under the Fourth Amendment for non-citizens as compared to citizens – a xenophobic Fourth Amendment.

State Law To The Contrary? Examining Potential Limits On The Authority Of State And Local Law Enforcement To Enforce Federal Immigration Law, George Bach

George Bach

As the Supreme Court recently reaffirmed in Arizona v. United States, it is well-established that the “authority of state officers to make arrests for federal crimes,” including federal immigration law, “is . . . a matter of state law.” This general, universal rule has not yielded consistent results. The circuit courts of appeals have disagreed as to when state and local law enforcement can invoke this “implicit authority” and enforce federal immigration law. On one end of the spectrum stands the Ninth Circuit view that state and local law enforcement only have such authority if affirmatively authorized by the state. …

Governors! Seize The Law: A Call To Expand The Use Of Pardons To Provide Relief From Deportation, Stacy Caplow

Stacy Caplow

An obscure provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act allows an immigrant convicted of a wide range of crimes that are grounds for deportation to avoid this fate if pardoned by a chief executive. In the current era of expansion of the categories of crimes that constitute grounds for deportation and the shrinkage of equitable forms of relief, a pardon presents a vehicle for ameliorating these harsh effects. But few presidents or governors take advantage of this opportunity, even when the individual facing deportation is a long-term lawful resident whose transgression occurred long ago. During a few months in 2010, …

Giving Shelter From The Storm: Colombians Fleeing Persecution Based On Sexual Orientation, Luz Estella Nagle

Luz Estella Nagle

Asylum seekers fleeing persecution due to sexual orientation face difficult challenges in proving their claims before United States immigration judges. Homosexuals in Latin America, and especially in Colombia, live under constant fear of harassment and violent attack, despite the fact that laws and constitutional rights are slowly being extended to the Gay and Lesbian population in Latin America. This article examines the conditions for LGBTs in Colombia, as a model for the region, to educate immigration judges about the horrific experiences that compel LGBTs to flee, and why they should be extended every consideration for gaining asylum in the United …

U.S. Asylum Law As A Path To Religious Persecution, Jack C. Dolance Ii

Jack C Dolance II

U.S. asylum law protects against persecution “on account of . . . religion.” But must the law protect a non-believer seeking religious asylum in the United States? Many may instinctively answer “no,” for a non-believer is by most definitions not “religious.” Such a response misses the mark, however—at least in the context of U.S. asylum law, which is subject to the First Amendment. The protection of religious liberty enshrined in the First Amendment embodies freedom from persecution on account of one’s “religion”—in whatever form that religion may take. In the asylum context, then, “religion” must be defined broadly. Protection from …

U.S. Asylum Law As A Path To Religious Persecution, Jack C. Dolance Ii

Jack C Dolance II

U.S. asylum law protects against persecution “on account of . . . religion.” But must the law protect a non-believer seeking religious asylum in the United States? Many may instinctively answer “no,” for a non-believer is by most definitions not “religious.” Such a response misses the mark, however—at least in the context of U.S. asylum law, which is subject to the First Amendment. The protection of religious liberty enshrined in the First Amendment embodies freedom from persecution on account of one’s “religion”—in whatever form that religion may take. In the asylum context, then, “religion” must be defined broadly. Protection from …

U.S. Asylum Law As A Path To Religious Persecution, Jack C. Dolance Ii

Jack C Dolance II

U.S. asylum law protects against persecution “on account of . . . religion.” But must the law protect a non-believer seeking religious asylum in the United States? Many may instinctively answer “no,” for a non-believer is by most definitions not “religious.” Such a response misses the mark, however—at least in the context of U.S. asylum law, which is subject to the First Amendment. The protection of religious liberty enshrined in the First Amendment embodies freedom from persecution on account of one’s “religion”—in whatever form that religion may take. In the asylum context, then, “religion” must be defined broadly. Protection from …

U.S. Asylum Law As A Path To Religious Persecution, Jack C. Dolance Ii

Jack C Dolance II

U.S. asylum law protects against persecution “on account of . . . religion.” But must the law protect a non-believer seeking religious asylum in the United States? Many may instinctively answer “no,” for a non-believer is by most definitions not “religious.” Such a response misses the mark, however—at least in the context of U.S. asylum law, which is subject to the First Amendment. The protection of religious liberty enshrined in the First Amendment embodies freedom from persecution on account of one’s “religion”—in whatever form that religion may take. In the asylum context, then, “religion” must be defined broadly. Protection from …

U.S. Asylum Law As A Path To Religious Persecution, Jack C. Dolance Ii

Jack C Dolance II

U.S. asylum law protects against persecution “on account of . . . religion.” But must the law protect a non-believer seeking religious asylum in the United States? Many may instinctively answer “no,” for a non-believer is by most definitions not “religious.” Such a response misses the mark, however—at least in the context of U.S. asylum law, which is subject to the First Amendment. The protection of religious liberty enshrined in the First Amendment embodies freedom from persecution on account of one’s “religion”—in whatever form that religion may take. In the asylum context, then, “religion” must be defined broadly. Protection from …

U.S. Asylum Law As A Path To Religious Persecution, Jack C. Dolance Ii

Jack C Dolance II

U.S. asylum law protects against persecution “on account of . . . religion.” But must the law protect a non-believer seeking religious asylum in the United States? Many may instinctively answer “no,” for a non-believer is by most definitions not “religious.” Such a response misses the mark, however—at least in the context of U.S. asylum law, which is subject to the First Amendment. The protection of religious liberty enshrined in the First Amendment embodies freedom from persecution on account of one’s “religion”—in whatever form that religion may take. In the asylum context, then, “religion” must be defined broadly. Protection from …

U.S. Asylum Law As A Path To Religious Persecution, Jack C. Dolance Ii

Jack C Dolance II

U.S. asylum law protects against persecution “on account of . . . religion.” But must the law protect a non-believer seeking religious asylum in the United States? Many may instinctively answer “no,” for a non-believer is by most definitions not “religious.” Such a response misses the mark, however—at least in the context of U.S. asylum law, which is subject to the First Amendment. The protection of religious liberty enshrined in the First Amendment embodies freedom from persecution on account of one’s “religion”—in whatever form that religion may take. In the asylum context, then, “religion” must be defined broadly. Protection from …

U.S. Asylum Law As A Path To Religious Persecution, Jack C. Dolance Ii

Jack C Dolance II

U.S. asylum law protects against persecution “on account of . . . religion.” But must the law protect a non-believer seeking religious asylum in the United States? Many may instinctively answer “no,” for a non-believer is by most definitions not “religious.” Such a response misses the mark, however—at least in the context of U.S. asylum law, which is subject to the First Amendment. The protection of religious liberty enshrined in the First Amendment embodies freedom from persecution on account of one’s “religion”—in whatever form that religion may take. In the asylum context, then, “religion” must be defined broadly. Protection from …

U.S. Asylum Law As A Path To Religious Persecution, Jack C. Dolance Ii

Jack C Dolance II

U.S. asylum law protects against persecution “on account of . . . religion.” But must the law protect a non-believer seeking religious asylum in the United States? Many may instinctively answer “no,” for a non-believer is by most definitions not “religious.” Such a response misses the mark, however—at least in the context of U.S. asylum law, which is subject to the First Amendment. The protection of religious liberty enshrined in the First Amendment embodies freedom from persecution on account of one’s “religion”—in whatever form that religion may take. In the asylum context, then, “religion” must be defined broadly. Protection from …