Immigration Law Commons^™

All The Presidents' Dreamers: Immigration Reform That Biden And Trump Can Agree On (And Why That Reform May Be Elusive), Victor C. Romero

Faculty Scholarship

While a sizeable gulf exists between the Trump and Biden administrations’ approaches to immigration, there is one policy area where these presidents would see eye-to-eye: a legal pathway for “Dreamers,” longtime undocumented residents who initially came to the U.S. as children. Notwithstanding this exceptional example of bipartisanship, how the nation now moves forward to create such a pathway is a conundrum. The political divide that has stalled a two-decades-long search for a congressional solution has its roots in America’s longstanding ambivalence about whether and how to provide basic opportunities to the least of its denizens. This Essay traces the current …

Requiring The Executive To Turn Square Corners: The Supreme Court Increases Agency Accountability In Department Of Homeland Security V. Regents Of The University Of California, Claudia J. Bernstein

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Administrative agencies frequently promulgate rules that have dramatic effects on peoples’ lives. Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (“DACA”) is one such example. DACA grants certain unlawful immigrants a temporary reprieve from deportation, as well as ancillary benefits such as work permits. In 2017, the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) sought to rescind DACA on the basis that the program violates the Immigration and Nationality Act.

This Comment analyzes the recent Supreme Court decision about DACA’s recission in Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of University of California. In rejecting DHS’s attempt to rescind DACA, the Court strengthened agency accountability …

Discretion And Disobedience In The Chinese Exclusion Era, Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia

Faculty Scholarship

This Article examines the use of prosecutorial discretion from its first recorded use in the nineteenth century to protect Chinese subject to deportation, following to its implication in modern day immigration policy. A foundational Supreme Court case, known as Fong Yue Ting, provides a historical precedent for the protection of a category of people as well as a deeper history of prosecutorial discretion in immigration law. This Article also sharpens the policy argument to protect political activists through prosecutorial discretion and forces consideration for how modern immigration policy should respond to historical exclusions and racialized laws. This Article centers its …

Removing Roadblocks: Alternatives To Lawful Status And Social Security Number Requirements For Pennsylvania Driver’S Licenses, Miranda Sasinovic

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

As part of their traditional state police powers, states determine the eligibility requirements for their driver’s licenses. Standard eligibility requirements include proof of age, residency, identity, and knowledge. In the 1990s, some states amended their vehicle codes to require proof of lawful status, effectively barring undocumented immigrants from obtaining driver’s licenses.

In response to inconsistent issuance and verification standards, Congress passed the REAL ID Act of 2005. The Act prohibits federal agencies from accepting state driver’s licenses for official purposes unless states comply with minimum issuance and verification standards. These standards include requirements to verify Social Security numbers and lawful …

Health Care Sanctuaries, Medha D. Makhlouf

Faculty Scholarly Works

It is increasingly common for noncitizens living in the United States to avoid seeing a doctor or enrolling in publicly funded health programs because they fear surveillance by immigration authorities. This is the consequence of a decades-long shift in the locus of immigration enforcement activities from the border to the interior, as well as a recent period of heightened immigration enforcement. These fears persist because the law incompletely constrains immigration surveillance in health care.

This Article argues that immigration surveillance in health care is a poor choice of resource allocation for immigration enforcement because it has severe consequences for health …

A Pathway To Health Care Citizenship For Daca Beneficiaries, Medha D. Makhlouf, Patrick J. Glen

Faculty Scholarly Works

Since 2012, beneficiaries of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) have enjoyed a certain normalization, however tenuous, of their status in the United States: they can legally work, their removal proceedings are deferred, and they cease to accrue unlawful presence. Regarding subsidized health coverage, however, DACA beneficiaries remain on the outside looking in. Although other deferred action beneficiaries are eligible for benefits through Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, and the Affordable Care Act, the Obama Administration specifically excluded DACA beneficiaries. This decision undermines DACA’s goal of legitimizing beneficiaries’ presence in the United States. From a health policy perspective, it …

Laboratories Of Exclusion: Medicaid, Federalism & Immigrants, Medha D. Makhlouf

Faculty Scholarly Works

Medicaid’s cooperative federalism structure gives states significant discretion to include or exclude various categories of immigrants. This has created extreme geographic variability in immigrants’ access to health coverage. This Article describes federalism’s role in influencing state policies on immigrant eligibility for Medicaid and its implications for national health policy. Although there are disagreements over the extent to which public funds should be used to subsidize immigrant health coverage, this Article reveals that decentralized policymaking on immigrant access to Medicaid has weakened national health policy. It has failed to incentivize the type of state policy experimentation and replication that justifies federalism …

Immigrants And Interdependence: How The Covid-19 Pandemic Exposes The Folly Of The New Public Charge Rule, Medha D. Makhlouf, Jasmine Sandhu

Faculty Scholarly Works

On February 24, 2020, just as the Trump administration began taking significant action to prepare for an outbreak of COVID-19 in the United States, it also began implementing its new public charge rule. Public charge is an immigration law that restricts the admission of certain noncitizens based on the likelihood that they will become dependent on the government for support. The major effect of the new rule is to chill noncitizens from enrolling in public benefits, including Medicaid, out of fear of negative immigration consequences. These chilling effects have persisted during the pandemic. When noncitizens are afraid to (1) seek …

The Ethics Of Dna Testing At The Border, Medha D. Makhlouf

Faculty Scholarly Works

From 2018 to 2020, the U.S. government dramatically expanded DNA surveillance of immigrants. The most recent expansion, finalized in March 2020, effectively requires the collection of DNA from all immigration detainees and storage of their genetic information in the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (“FBI”) Combined DNA Index System (“CODIS”) database for criminal forensic investigation. This new policy is ethically troubling because it fails to address the potential privacy harms it creates; shifts the application of DNA analysis for criminal investigation from retrospective to prospective assessment of criminality; and disparately impacts racial and ethnic minorities. In this time of extreme immigration …

Darkside Discretion In Immigration Cases, Shoba Wadhia

Faculty Scholarship

"Darkside Discretion" refers to a situation where the noncitizen satisfies the statutory criteria set by Congress to be eligible for remedy but is denied by an adjudicator in the exercise of discretion. Imagine a woman who arrived in the United States six months ago who meets her burden of proving she is a refugee based on a fear of persecution by the government in her home country because of her religious beliefs, but who is denied asylum for discretionary reasons. This kind of decision exposes the "darkside" of discretion because it reflects how the government uses the tool of discretion …

The Case Against Chevron Deference In Immigration Adjudication, Shoba Wadhia, Christopher Walker

Faculty Scholarship

The Duke Law Journal’s fifty-first annual administrative law symposium examines the future of Chevron deference—the command that a reviewing court defer to an agency’s reasonable interpretation of an ambiguous statute the agency administers. In the lead article, Professors Kristin Hickman and Aaron Nielson argue that the Supreme Court should narrow Chevron’s domain to exclude interpretations made via administrative adjudication. Building on their framing, this Article presents an in-depth case study of immigration adjudication and argues that this case against Chevron has perhaps its greatest force when it comes to immigration. That is because much of Chevron’s theory for congressional delegation …

Destigmatizing Disability In The Law Of Immigration Admissions, Medha D. Makhlouf

Faculty Contributions to Books

In U.S. immigration law, disability has historically been associated with deviance, and has served as the basis for legal barriers to entry and eventual citizenship. For example, immigrants with actual and perceived physical and intellectual disabilities, mental illness, and other health conditions have been deemed “inadmissible” to the United States based on the belief that they are likely to become dependent on the government for support. Although the law has evolved to accommodate immigrants with disabilities in some ways, significant legal barriers still exist on account of the widespread, persistent characterization of disability as a “bad difference” from the norm. …

The Public Charge Rule As Public Health Policy, Medha D. Makhlouf

Faculty Scholarly Works

A recent Gallup poll found that health care, the economy, and immigration are the top three most important political issues for U.S. voters. Public charge policy—which relates to the admission of noncitizens based on the likelihood that they will not become dependent on the U.S. government for support—lies at the intersection of these three topics. At the same time, immigration and welfare reform are prominent agenda items for the current administration. On October 10, 2018, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would transform public charge policy that has existed for more than a …

Remarks On Prosecutorial Discretion And Immigration, Shoba S. Wadhia

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

No abstract provided.

Health Justice For Immigrants, Medha D. Makhlouf

Faculty Scholarly Works

Should universal health coverage include immigrants within the “universe?” Should federal taxpayers subsidize health insurance coverage for immigrants, even those who are undocumented? Should all immigrants be required to purchase health insurance? Although the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is conceived as a progressive project to expand access to coverage and promote equity in health care, it intentionally left out the 12.5 million undocumented immigrants living in the United States and preserved the existing restrictions on subsidized coverage for lawfully present non-citizens. In fact, it increased the disparity in access to health care between U.S. citizens and immigrants. As a result, …

Remarks On Prosecutorial Discretion And Immigration, Shoba Wadhia

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Immigration Litigation In The Time Of Trump, Shoba Wadhia

Faculty Scholarship

A number of immigration policies have been announced, implemented, or challenged in courts during the first half of Donald J. Trump's presidency. This Essay provides an update on ongoing litigation on a handful of these policies and was inspired by keynote remarks delivered at the Emerging Immigration Scholars Conference at Brigham Young University in June 2019. The topics covered by this Essay include: litigation affecting those covered by the travel or "Muslim Ban," asylum policy changes, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals ("DACA"), unlawful presence rules, and the border wall. This Essay also discusses lessons and common themes emerging from the …

Americans In Waiting: Finding Solutions For Long Term Residents, Shoba Wadhia

Faculty Scholarship

For more than a century, U.S. immigration law has recognized long-term residence as a primary factor in granting formal relief or protection. The rationale for regularizing the status of long-term residence is both clear and multifaceted. Over time, long-term residents in the United States build families, buy homes, and integrate into their communities. These equities, coupled with long-term residence, are reflected in the laws used to legalize and protect noncitizens. Many of these laws include a discretionary component, which is itself a powerful sword used by judges and officers when making immigration decisions.

This paper explores the history and role …

The Limits Of Pro Se Assistance In Immigration Proceedings: Discussion Of Nwirp V. Sessions, Ryan D. Brunsink, Christina L. Powers

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

This Article discusses issues regarding assistance of pro se litigants in the context of immigration law. In particular, Part II of this Article highlights programs such as the Legal Orientation Program (LOP) and Immigration Court Helpdesk (ICH) that attempt to alleviate some of the inherent difficulties non-citizen detainees face in immigration proceedings. Part III of this Article focuses on a 2008 Regulation by the Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR), which calls for discipline against attorneys that engage in a pattern or practice of failing to enter a Notice of Appearance when engaged in practice or preparation. Lastly, Part IV …

Immigration Enforcement And The Future Of Discretion, Shoba Wadhia

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

National Security, Immigration And The Muslim Bans, Shoba Wadhia

Faculty Scholarship

National security language has continued to guide the creation and defense of Executive Orders and related immigration policies issued in the Donald J. Trump administration. This Article builds on earlier scholarship examining the relationship between national security and immigration in the wake of September 11, 2001, under the Obama administration, and during the campaign leading to the 2016 Election. While the Article is largely descriptive, it ultimately questions the longevity of using national security to create and defend immigration law. This Article is limited in scope -- it does not provide a deep dive into the constitutionality of the Muslim …

The End Of Special Treatment For Cubans In The U.S. Immigration System: Consequences And Solutions For Cubans With Final Orders Of Removal, Lindsay Daniels

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

In January 2016, former President Obama announced the end of the “Wet-Foot, Dry-Foot” Policy, which granted special immigration benefits to Cuban migrants. As part of the agreement to end this policy, the Cuban government agreed to take back its citizens with final orders of removal for criminal convictions, an action that it had refused to take for decades. This Comment will begin by exploring past and present immigration policies between the United States and Cuba, including recent developments like the normalization of relations and the impact of President Trump’s immigration policies.

This Comment will then explore possible avenues of relief …

Stopping The Clock: Resolving The Circuit Split Over The Notice To Appear And The Stop-Time Rule Under The Immigration And Nationality Act, Maria Kennison

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA or “the Act”) is the primary governing body of law on immigration in the United States. The INA establishes the procedures for removing noncitizens from the country.

To initiate removal proceedings, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) serves a Notice to Appear (NTA) on a noncitizen deemed to be removable. The INA specifies information to be contained in the NTA, including the hearing date and location. A form of relief from removal that noncitizens may apply for is cancellation of removal, which is contingent on factors such as continuous residence in the United States …

But It’S Just A Little White Lie! An Analysis Of The Materiality Requirement Of 18 U.S.C. § 1425, Hanna E. Borsilli

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Once an individual becomes a naturalized citizen, the U.S. government can revoke citizenship only upon a discovery that the individual was not eligible to procure naturalization at the time of application. The process to revoke naturalization, referred to as denaturalization, may begin with a conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 1425, a criminal statute broadly prohibiting any attempt to procure naturalization “contrary to law.”

This “contrary to law” language created confusion regarding the required statutory elements of § 1425. Most courts to address this issue, including the Supreme Court in Maslenjak v. United States, held that § 1425 requires proof …

Theorizing The Immigrant Child: The Case Of Married Minors, Medha D. Makhlouf

Faculty Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

The Aftermath Of United States V. Texas, Shoba S. Wadhia

Faculty Scholarship

On June 23, 2016, the Supreme Court issued a 4-4 ruling in the immigration case of United States v. Texas, blocking two “deferred action” programs announced by President Obama on November 20, 2014: extended Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA Plus) and Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Legal Residents (DAPA). The 4-4 ruling by the justices creates a non-precedential non-decision, upholding an injunction placed by a panel of federal judges in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. While the future of these programs remains uncertain in the long term, the immediate effects are pronounced, as millions of …

Practitioner's Toolkit On Cancellation Of Removal For Lawful Permanent Residents, Penn State Law Immigrants' Rights Clinic, Pennsylvania Immigration Resource Center

Center for Immigrants' Rights Clinic Publications

Created on behalf of the Pennsylvania Immigration Resource Center (PIRC), the toolkit is a resource for immigration attorneys representing lawful permanent residents who are facing removal from the United States.

Panel Presentation, Peter J. Smith, Heidi Freese, Grace Meng, Lori Ulrich

Center For Immigrants’ Rights Clinic Events

No abstract provided.

Remarks On Executive Action And Immigration Reform, Shoba S. Wadhia

Faculty Scholarship

This essay places the President's executive actions on immigration last November into a larger context by providing a brief history of prosecutorial discretion in immigration cases. This essay also describes how law students at Penn State Law School used the President's announcement of executive actions as a platform for local change in the State College community.

The President And Deportation: Daca, Dapa, And The Sources And Limits Of Executive Authority - Response To Hiroshi Motomura, Shoba S. Wadhia

Faculty Scholarship

This Essay is a response to Washburn University School of Law's Foulston Siefkin Lecture, 2015 titled "The President and Deportation: DACA, DAPA, and the Sources and Limits of Executive Authority," delivered by Professor Hiroshi Motomura in March of 2015. Part II of this Essay provides a summary of Professor Motomura's remarks from this author's vantage point. Part III of this Essay analyzes and supports Professor Motomura's conclusion that deferred action is "different" from prosecutorial discretion and elaborates on how deferred action goes one step "further" than prosecutorial discretion.