Law Commons^™

Temporary Protection Status: A Yugoslavian Precedent, Medina Dzubur

Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

Analyzing the past use of temporary protection status to shield those facing "ethnic cleansing, massacres, mass rapes, and cultural vandalism" is fundamental in understanding how this tool can be utilized to protect modern refugees, and why EU members have refused to implement this status further. In other words, should temporary protection status, considering the legal framework and the socioeconomic effects, be granted to Syrian refugees? This note argues in favor of granting temporary protection status to Syrian refugees because the status (1) offers a recourse for displaced persons that would not be covered by traditional legal protections, (2) produces quicker …

Veterans Banished: The Fight To Bring Them Home, Alejandra Martinez

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

Abstract forthcoming.

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

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Driving Down The Wrong Road: The Fifth Circuit's Definition Of Unauthorized Use Of A Motor Vehicle As A Crime Of Violence In The Immigration Context., Heather Harrison Volik

St. Mary's Law Journal

Individuals who are not United States citizens and participate in violent or severe criminal activity are likely to be deported and become inadmissible for life. But noncitizens can also be deported for minor criminal activity which does not cause harm or serious damage. In such cases, deportation is an extreme punishment out of proportion to the offense. Unauthorized use of a motor vehicle (UUMV) is an example of a crime which can be committed without serious harm or damage. The Fifth Circuit regularly sustains decisions of lifetime reentry ban for noncitizens convicted of UUMV. Under immigration law, “aliens” who are …

Editor's Note, Padraig O'Malley

New England Journal of Public Policy

Much has changed in the world since the last issue of this journal. All is indeed changed and changed utterly. But we have no terrible beauty with which to console ourselves. For the foreseeable future, the debate over whether we live in a unilateral or multilateral world is moot. A new Rome rules with an arrogance only the truly certain can master.

The invasion of Iraq definitively answered the question: What is the New World Order? America is, and America’s order will continue until Americans themselves decide otherwise, and that, in the short term at least, means whether they will …

America's Preoccupation With Ethics In Government Essay., Vincent R. Johnson

St. Mary's Law Journal

Many Americans today expect that the law can, should, and will be used to ensure a level playing field in public life. Americans expect the law to eliminate, insofar as possible, any unfair advantage that might be gained through the use of special connections to those who exercise the power of government. There are numerous rules applicable to judges, lawyers, and public officials that each seek to promote equal treatment for all persons by limiting the ability of persons to use special connections and privileged relationships to gain an advantage in public affairs. There were two threads of development in …

Immigration Reform: Seeking The Right Reasons., Lamar Smith, Edward R. Grant

St. Mary's Law Journal

The legacy of immigration to the United States permeates the debate over current immigration policy. Because our self-definition as a nation is at stake in this debate, the issue of immigration arouses our deepest sentiments regarding the communities in which we live. We do not need to search far back in our history to find examples of imprudent law-making. Both the 1924 and 1925 immigration laws were motivated in large part by purposes which eventually undermined the principles on which they rested. These acts serve as prime examples of how employing erroneous reasons to enact even well-intentioned laws can be …

A Tortured Construction: The Illegal Immigration Reform And Immigrant Responsibility Act's Express Bar Denying Criminal Aliens Withholding Of Deportation Defies The Principles Of International Law Comment., Bobbie Marie Guerra

St. Mary's Law Journal

The United States has never fully complied with international agreements concerning refugee’s rights to not be returned to a country where he or she faces certain threats of torture. This lack of compliance by the United States is exacerbated by two conflicting interests: the growing insistence on keeping aliens outside the nation’s borders and protecting international refugees who endure gross violations of their human rights. The recent amendments to the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) provide a contemporary example of the volatility and inconsistency of the United States’ immigration policy. In April 1996, Congress enacted the Antiterrorism and Effective Death …

Distinguishing Fong Yue Ting: Why The Inclusion Of Perjury As An Aggravated Felony Subjecting Legal Aliens To Deportation Under The Antiterrorism And Effective Death Penalty Act Violates The Eighth Amendment Comment., Gregory L. Ryan

St. Mary's Law Journal

Responding to the terrorist bombing in Oklahoma City, Congress spent several months researching and discussing the best ways to strengthen the United States’ ability to deter and punish terrorism. In 1996, Congress sent a bill to the President designed to make the country safer, and President Clinton signed the bill into law: The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA). The AEDPA mandates a foreign national convicted of perjury be deported. Tucked away in the middle of the AEDPA, strict sanctions are imposed on noncitizens who commit perjury or subordination of perjury. In an attempt to strengthen the …

In Re Oluloro: Risk Of Female Genital Mutilation As Extreme Hardship In Immigration Proceedings Symposium - Human Rights In The Americas - Recent Development., Patricia Dysart Rudloff

St. Mary's Law Journal

On March 23, 1994, in In re Oluloro, Immigration Judge Kendall Warren’s decision indicated the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) should consider human rights abuses directed at women. The overriding concern was the possibility that two young U.S. girls would suffer female genital mutilation (FGM) if the INS deported their mother to Nigeria. In reaching the decision to suspend the mother’s deportation, Judge Warren condemned FGM as “cruel and serv[ing] no known medical purpose.” Judge Warren ruled the practice presented an extreme hardship for the girls. Unfortunately, the court’s ruling has no precedential value because the INS did …

Part I. Final Text Of The Nato Agreements On Status A. Agreement Between The Parties To The North Atlantic Treaty Regarding The Status Of Their Forces, Joseph M. Snee

International Law Studies

No abstract provided.