Immigration Law Commons^™

Save Your Rights: How Florida And Other States Have Targeted Voting Access Following The 2020 Election, Francisco Varona

FIU Law Review

Following the 2020 general election, Florida’s Republican led legislature introduced Senate Bill 90 (“S.B. 90”), which seeks to put many restrictions on various aspects of the voting process. S.B. 90 limits ballot drop-off boxes, restricts mail-in voting, proscribes “line-warming,” increases registration difficulty, and expands identification requirements. Despite lauding Florida’s election as a gold standard for the rest of the country, Governor Ron DeSantis approved this bill in May of 2021, explaining that Florida should not become complacent despite its success. The Republican Governor approved this law against the backdrop of record voter turnout for Black and Latino voters and record …

A Civil Shame: The Failure To Protect Due Process In Discretionary Immigration Bond Hearings, Stacy L. Brustin

Brooklyn Law Review

Over the last four years, the US Supreme Court has granted certiorari in four immigration bond review cases. The sheer number of cases the Court has recently considered underscores the significance of this area of immigration law. Each case centers on whether the Immigration and Nationality Act or the Constitution mandates a bond review hearing after prolonged detention. Yet these cases leave unresolved the issue of whether initial bond hearings themselves meet the due process threshold required of civil confinement proceedings. Federal circuit and district courts have addressed aspects of this question and found procedural due process violations. However, most …

Ice Transfers And The Detention Archipelago, Sabrina Balgamwalla

Journal of Law and Policy

This article examines transfers as an understudied but critical dimension of the immigration detention system. Transfers regularly take detainees in immigration custody from public to private facilities, across state lines, and beyond the jurisdiction of individual courts. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) has virtually unlimited authority to use transfers strategically to further agency goals of immigration enforcement. For individual detainees, transfers shape outcomes in their immigration cases. Noncitizens are regularly funneled into detention centers in legal jurisdictions generally hostile to claims for relief. Transfers also regularly send detainees to facilities in isolated, rural communities, where they are more likely to …

Scotus On Immigration: A Review Of Recent Decisions & What's To Come, Cardozo Journal Of Equal Rights And Social Justice

2022 Event Invitations

Please join the Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights and Social Justice for a panel discussion with seven immigration attorneys. The discussion will cover recent SCOTUS decisions impacting immigration, the impacts of these decisions and important cases on the docket for this upcoming session.

Moderator: Mauricio Noroña, Visiting Clinical Assistant Professor of Law in the Kathryn O. Greenberg Immigration Justice Clinic, Cardozo Law

Panelists:

• Peter Markowitz, Associate Dean of Equity in Curriculum and Teaching and Professor of Law, Founding Faculty Member and Co-Director of the Kathryn O. Greenberg Immigration Justice Clinic, Cardozo Law

• Lindsay Nash, Associate Professor of Law, Co-Director of …

Scotus On Immigration: A Review Of Recent Decisions & What's To Come, Cardozo Journal Of Equal Rights And Social Justice

2022–2023 Flyers

Click here to view the event invitation.

Racecraft And Identity In The Emergence Of Islam As A Race, Cyra Akila Choudhury

University of Cincinnati Law Review

Can a religion, over time and through its social and legal resignification, come to be a race? Drawing on Critical Race Theory (“CRT”), Critical Discourse Theory, the work of Karen E. and Barbara J. Fields and Cedric Robinson, this article argues that Islam has emerged as a race and Muslims as a racial group. To support the claim, Part I examines the theoretical basis for the argument. Applying the concept of “racecraft,” the article theorizes that racism produces both the racial group and race. As many have already argued, race is not based in biology; it is not a fact …

Systemic Racism In The U.S. Immigration Laws, Kevin R. Johnson

Indiana Law Journal

This Essay analyzes how aggressive activism in a California mountain town at the tail end of the nineteenth century commenced a chain reaction resulting in state and ultimately national anti-Chinese immigration laws. The constitutional immunity through which the Supreme Court upheld those laws deeply affected the future trajectory of U.S. immigration law and policy.

Responding to sustained political pressure from the West, Congress in 1882 passed the Chinese Exclusion Act, an infamous piece of unabashedly racist legislation that commenced a long process of barring immigration from all of Asia to the United States. In upholding the Act, the Supreme Court …

Takings Property And Appropriative Water Rights, Luis Inaraja Vera

Cardozo Law Review

The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that “private property [shall not] be taken for public use, without just compensation.”1 While courts and academics have put considerable amounts of effort into discussing the meaning of “taken” or “public use,” they have given far less attention to the phrase “private property.” Notable scholars have provided a set of definitions and frameworks to determine when a particular right qualifies as takings property. However, courts and commentators have yet to define the types of rights that are entitled to constitutional protection with sufficient precision to avoid an …

Nevada As An Example: State Immigration Reform In A Swing State, Michael Kagan, Selena Torres, Jorge "Coco" Padilla

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Stopping Anti-Asian Hate: Local Solutions To A National Problem, Stewart Chang

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Renewing The Vagueness Challenge To Crimes Involving Moral Turpitude, Melissa London

Washington Law Review

Noncitizens who have been convicted of a “crime involving moral turpitude” (CIMT) under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) can be deported. However, the INA fails to provide a definition for “moral turpitude” or a list of crimes that necessarily involve “moral turpitude.” As a result, judges are given wide discretion to decide when a crime is morally reprehensible enough to render a noncitizen deportable. This moral determination in the CIMT analysis has led to disparate results among the lower courts, which deprives noncitizens of meaningful notice of what conduct could render them deportable. In 1951, the Supreme Court held …

Limited Protection: The Impact Of Illegal Entry On Due Process Rights In Expedited Removal Proceedings, Sun Shen

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

[...] This Note argues that illegal entry often limits the scope of asylum seekers’ due process rights in court and negatively impacts the asylum process in a way that runs afoul with the spirit of due process and fairness. Asylum eligibility should not hinge on whether entry is legal, but whether applicants are able to meet the evidentiary burden. Conditioning asylum seekers’ procedural due process rights on the legality of entry creates arbitrary asylum results and carries high risks of sending back asylum seekers to danger, simply because they were not able to obtain valid travel documents from the governments …

Immigration Detention And Illusory Alternatives To Habeas, Fatma Marouf

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court has never directly addressed whether, or under what circumstances, a writ of habeas corpus may be used to challenge the conditions of detention, as opposed to the fact or duration of detention. Consequently, a circuit split exists on habeas jurisdiction over conditions claims. The COVID-19 pandemic brought this issue into the spotlight as detained individuals fearing infection, serious illness, and death requested release through habeas petitions around the country. One of the factors that courts considered in deciding whether to exercise habeas jurisdiction was whether alternative remedies exist, through a civil rights or tort-based action. This Article …

Heirs Of An Administration: Unlawful Executive Actions, Jerome Perez

Catholic University Law Review

The Supreme Court of the United States in DHS v. Regents on June 18, 2020, decided to stall the Trump administration from rescinding the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) policy that the Obama administration created contrary to the Administrative Procedures Act (APA)––even though in 2016 the Supreme Court affirmed a preliminary injunction on the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA) policy, which mirrors DACA. This blunder offhandedly sacrifices the Supreme Court’s reputation as nonpartisan by enlisting itself as the future arbiter of administrative issues with self-evident resolutions and deciding contrary to those resolutions to endorse a political agenda. …

Cruel And Unusual Punishment: The Eighth Amendment And Ice Detainees In The Covid-19 Crisis, Nechelle Nicholas

Pace Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rising Up Without Pushing Down: Lessons Learned From The Suffragettes' Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric, Kit Johnson

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

American suffragist Elizabeth Cady Stanton famously wrote: “We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men and women are created equal.” Yet when suffragettes spoke of “all” men and women, they were clear about exceptions. Immigrants did not qualify. Indeed, in her own address at the First Women’s Rights Convention, held in Seneca Falls, New York, in July 1848, Stanton said that “to have . . . ignorant foreigners . . . fully recognized, while we ourselves are thrust out from all the rights that belong to citizens, it is too grossly insulting to the dignity of woman …

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents

Foreword, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Foreward

Table Of Contents

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents

The Immigrant Struggle For Effective Counsel: An Empirical Assessment, Jayanth K. Krishnan

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Recently, in Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam, the Supreme Court upheld 8 U.S.C. § 1252(e)(2), a statutory provision placing restrictions on certain noncitizens from seeking habeas review in the federal judiciary. The Court focused on the Constitution’s Suspension Clause, but it also discussed the Due Process Clause, declaring that there was no violation there either.

One question which flows from this decision is whether the federal courts will soon be precluded from hearing other types of claims brought by noncitizens. Consider ineffective assistance of counsel petitions, which in the immigration law context are rooted in the Due Process Clause. …

Immigration Detention As A Violation Of Transgender Detainees' Substantive Due Process Rights, Emily Torstveit Ngara

Lewis & Clark Law Review

Noncitizens in immigration proceedings are often subject to civil detention pending a final decision on their case. Transgender individuals in immigration detention are at high risk for physical and sexual assault, cruel and degrading treatment, denial of necessary medical care, and protective isolation. The well-documented harms caused to transgender individuals in detention violate Fifth Amendment substantive due process. This Article documents the harms of immigration detention specific to the transgender community, reviews substantive due process jurisprudence in the civil detention context, and analogizes Eighth Amendment claims for transgender prisoners to substantive due process claims. Immigration detention is predicated on the …

Moral Economies Of Family Reunification In The Trump Era: Translating Natural Affiliation, Autonomy, And Stability Arguments Into Constitutional Rights, Kerry Abrams, Daniel Pham

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Regulatory Constitutional Law: Protecting Immigrant Free Speech Without Relying On The First Amendment, Michael Kagan

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

When Interpretive Communities Clash On Immigration Law: The Courts’ Mediating Role In Noncitizens’ Rights And Remedies, Peter Margulies

Touro Law Review

Immigration law gains clarity through the lens of Robert Cover's compelling work on law as a "system of meaning." Cover's vision inspires us to consider immigration law as a contest between two interpretive communities: acolytes of the protective approach, which sees law as a haven for noncitizens fleeing harm in their home countries, and followers of the regulatory approach, which stresses sovereignty and strict adherence to legal categories. Immigration law's contest between contending camps need not be a zero-sum game. As Cover and Alex Aleinikoff observed in their classic article on habeas corpus, a legal remedy can also be a …

Centering Noncitizens’ Free Speech, Gregory P. Magarian

Scholarship@WashULaw

First Amendment law pays little attention to noncitizens’ free speech interests. Perhaps noncitizens simply enjoy the same First Amendment rights as citizens. However, ambivalent and sometimes hostile Supreme Court precedents create serious cause for concern. This Essay advocates moving noncitizens’ free speech from the far periphery to the center of First Amendment law. Professor Magarian posits that noncitizens epitomize a condition of speech inequality, in which social conditions and legal doctrines combine to create distinctive, unwarranted barriers to full participation in public discourse. First Amendment law can ameliorate speech inequality by promoting an ethos of free speech obligation, amplifying the …

Countering The Criminal Nature Of Immigration Enforcement: A Proposal To Expand Constitutional Safeguards, Madeleine Powers

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Hernández V. Mesa: A Case For A More Meaningful Partnership With The Inter-American Commission On Human Rights, Peyton Jacobsen

Seattle University Law Review

Through an in-depth examination of Hernández, the Inter-American Human Rights System, and the success of Mexico’s partnership with said system, this Note will make a case for embracing human rights bodies— specifically, the Inter-American System on Human Rights—as an appropriate and necessary check on the structures that form the United States government. Part I will look closely at the reasoning and judicially created doctrine that guided the decision in Hernández, with the goal of providing a better understanding of the complicated path through the courts that led to a seemingly straightforward yet unsatisfying result. Part II will illustrate the scope …

The 'Impractical And Anomalous' Consequences Of Territorial Inequity, Jayanth K. Krishnan

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Located in the South Pacific Ocean, American Samoa is one of five populated “unincorporated territories” of the United States. It is unique, though, as those born there are not recognized as American citizens at birth and instead are deemed “noncitizen U.S. nationals.” They enjoy some, but not all, constitutional protections. Two federal appellate courts—the D.C. Circuit (in 2015) and the Tenth Circuit (in 2021)—have ruled that this classification does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause. Both courts have stated that it would be “impractical” and “anomalous” to extend birthright citizenship to the American Samoan community.

Drawing upon a powerful …

"You Should Have Known:" The Need For Evidentiary Notice Requirements In Immigration Court, Marisa Moore Apel

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Without A Voice, Without A Forum: Finding Iirira Section 1252(G) Unconstitutional, Amanda Simms

Brooklyn Law Review

The Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) abrogates sovereign immunity in certain circumstances to allow private individuals, regardless of citizenship, to sue the United States for specific torts committed by government officials. Yet when two lawful permanent residents—located in different parts of the country—separately tried to sue the government for wrongful removal, one court dismissed the suit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction while the other court did not. These decisions, though reaching opposite conclusions, both relied on federal immigration statute 8 U.S.C. § 1252(g) in order to determine whether judicial review of immigrants’ removal orders is precluded. This note argues …