Immigration Law Commons^™

Why Protect Unauthorized Workers? Imperfect Proxies, Unaccountable Employers, And Antidiscrimination Law's Failures, Angela D. Morrison

Faculty Scholarship

This article explores a gap in the scholarship regarding the unauthorized workplace. It describes and names the two main justifications on which advocates and courts have relied to extend federal antidiscrimination protections to unauthorized workers. First, the proxy justification insists that workplace protections must include unauthorized workers because their protection is necessary to protect U.S. citizen and authorized workers. Second, the deterrence/accountability justification states that workplace protections must include unauthorized workers because it will deter employers from future violations of antidiscrimination laws and hold them accountable for violations of immigration law. While these justifications have led to some protection for …

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 …

Covid-19 And Prisoners’ Rights, Gregory Bernstein, Stephanie Guzman, Maggie Hadley, Rosalyn M. Huff, Alison Hung, Anita N.H. Yandle, Alexis Hoag, Bernard E. Harcourt

Faculty Scholarship

As COVID-19 continues to spread rapidly across the country, the crowded and unsanitary conditions in prisons, jails, juvenile detention, and immigration detention centers leave incarcerated individuals especially vulnerable. This chapter will discuss potential avenues for detained persons and their lawyers seeking to use the legal system to obtain relief, including potential release, during this extraordinary, unprecedented crisis.

Coordinating Injunctions, Bert I. Huang

Faculty Scholarship

Consider this scenario: Two judges with parallel cases are each ready to issue an injunction. But their injunctions may clash, ordering incompatible actions by the defendant. Each judge has written an opinion justifying her own intended relief, but the need to avoid conflicting injunctions presses her to make a further choice – “Should I issue the injunction or should I stay it for now?” Each must make this decision in anticipation of what the other will do.

This Article analyzes such a judicial coordination problem, drawing on recent examples including the DACA cases and the “sanctuary cities” cases. It then …

Injustice And The Disappearance Of Discretionary Detention Under Trump: Detaining Low Risk Immigrants Without Bond, Robert Koulish, Kate Evans

Faculty Scholarship

This Report demonstrates that the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) violates legal requirements to provide immigrants with an individualized custody determination. Trump’s enforcement policies brought a surge of low-risk immigrants into ICE custody. The detention risk tool was supposed to train officers and strongly discourage them from detaining low-risk immigrants who posed no harm to society and were not a flight risk. Data received pursuant to FOIA show the opposite result. ICE has failed to perform the individualized assessment and restrict its use of civil detention to only those whose high levels of dangerousness and risk of flight justify their …

Third Country Deportation, Sarah R. Sherman-Stokes

Faculty Scholarship

The large-scale deportation of noncitizens from the United States is not new. However, the speed, and secrecy, by which many of these deportations are carried out is unprecedented. Deportations are, increasingly, executed not through a legal court process, but rather, extrajudicially—in detention centers and at border crossings, outside the purview of judges or neutral adjudicators. One kind of this “shadow deportation” is what I term “third country deportation”—the removal of noncitizens to a country other than that designated by an Immigration Judge, after relief to the designated country has been granted, and after the court proceeding has concluded.

This article …

The Past As Present, Unlearned Lessons And The (Non-) Utility Of International Law, Susan M. Akram

Faculty Scholarship

The contemporary moment provides an acute illustration of the dangers of historical amnesia—as if the Trump Administration’s policies of exclusion, extremist nationalism, and presidential imperialism were singular to ‘now,’ and entirely reversible in the next election. This Article argues to the contrary; that we have been down this road before, and the current crisis in immigration and refugee policies is the inevitable development of trends of racism, including anti-Arab, anti-Muslim racism and xenophobia, that have only become normalized by the populist resurgence of Trumpism. If this premise is correct—that we are experiencing a culmination of a historical trajectory—what lessons from …

Subfederal Immigration Regulation And The Trump Effect, Huyen Pham, Pham Hoang Van

Faculty Scholarship

The restrictive changes made by the Trump presidency on U.S. immigration policy have been widely reported: the significant increases in both interior and border enforcement, the travel ban prohibiting immigration from majority-Muslim countries, and the termination of the DACA program. Beyond the traditional levers of federal immigration control, this administration has also moved aggressively to harness the enforcement power of local and state police to increase interior immigration enforcement. To that end, the administration has employed both voluntary measures (like signing 287(g) agreements deputizing local police to enforce immigration laws) and involuntary measures (threatening to defund jurisdictions with so-called “sanctuary” …

Executive Overreaching In Immigration Adjudication, Fatma Marouf

Faculty Scholarship

While Presidents have broad powers over immigration, they have traditionally shown restraint when it comes to influencing the adjudication of individual cases. The Trump Administration, however, has pushed past such conventional constraints. This Article examines executive overreaching in immigration adjudication by analyzing three types of interference. First, the Article discusses political interference with immigration adjudicators, including politicized appointments of judges, politicized performance metrics, and politicized training materials. Second, the Article addresses executive interference with the process of adjudication, examining how recent immigration decisions by former Attorney General Jeff Sessions curtail noncitizens’ procedural rights instead of making policy choices and promote …

Preserving Habeas Corpus For Asylum Seekers Just When They Need It Most, Jennifer Moore

Faculty Scholarship

The blog post reviews are very recent Ninth Circuit case, Thuraissigiam, which holds that “asylum seekers facing deportation have the right to challenge the summary denial of their asylum claims in federal court". The ruling in Thuraissigiam applies to individuals who have failed to establish a “credible fear of persecution” in expedited removal proceedings conducted at the border.

Becoming Unconventional: Constricting The 'Particular Social Group' Ground For Asylum, Fatma Marouf

Faculty Scholarship

Part I of this Article provides a brief background about the evolution of the PSG ground in the United States and how it has become increasingly complicated and constricted over time. Part II discusses several ways that recent administrative decisions have imposed uniquely strict requirements for PSG-based asylum claims, both procedurally and substantively. Namely, the recent decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") in Matter of W-Y-C- & H-O-B- creates two new procedural restrictions. First, it imposes an exceedingly strict pleading standard in PSG cases by requiring "exact delineation" of the PSG. Second, Matter of W-Y-Cprohibits asylum seekers from …

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

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Invoking Federal Common Law Defenses In Immigration Cases, Fatma Marouf

Faculty Scholarship

This Article argues that we should take a deeper look at the applicability of federal common law defenses in immigration cases. In the rare cases where noncitizens attempt to raise common law defenses, such arguments tend to be dismissed offhand by immigration judges simply because removal proceedings are technically civil, not criminal. Yet many common-law defenses may be raised in civil cases. Additionally, immigration proceedings have become increasingly intertwined with the criminal system. After examining how judges already rely on federal common law to fill in gaps in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), this Article proposes three categories of …

Remarks On Prosecutorial Discretion And Immigration, Shoba Wadhia

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Is Korematsu Good Law?, Jamal Greene

Faculty Scholarship

In Trump v. Hawaii, the Supreme Court claimed to overrule its infamous Korematsu decision. This Essay argues that this claim is both empty and grotesque. It is empty because a decision to overrule a prior case is not meaningful unless it specifies which propositions the Court is disavowing. Korematsu stands for many propositions, not all of which are agreed upon, but the Hawaii Court underspecifies what it meant to overrule. The Court’s claim of overruling Korematsu is grotesque because its emptiness means to conceal its disturbing affinity with that case.

Jurisdiction Stripping Circa 2020: What The Dialogue (Still) Has To Teach Us, Henry P. Monaghan

Faculty Scholarship

Since its publication in 1953, Henry Hart’s famous article, The Power of Congress to Limit the Jurisdiction of Federal Courts: An Exercise in Dialectic, subsequently referred to as simply “The Dialogue,” has served as the leading scholarly treatment of congressional control over the federal courts. Now in its seventh decade, much has changed since Hart first wrote. This Article examines what lessons The Dialogue still holds for its readers circa 2020.

Detention As Deterrence, Emily Ryo

Faculty Scholarship

Does immigration detention deter unauthorized migration? This is a pressing question with critical policy implications given that the U.S. government has detained tens of thousands of migrants in reliance on this deterrence rationale. Briefly described, the federal government has argued that “one particular individual may be civilly detained for the sake of sending a message” to others “who may be considering immigration. In recent times, the potential migrants to whom the federal government has sought to send such a message are, by and large, from Mexico and Central America. Emerging empirical research, however, provides little to no evidence that detention …

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 …

Reparations For Central American Refugees, Sarah R. Sherman-Stokes

Faculty Scholarship

In the midst of vicious and unrelenting attacks on Central American asylum seekers in the United States, this Article seeks to understand historic and present-day patterns of animus and discrimination facing this group of refugees, and to propose solutions. This Article begins by examining decades of prejudice faced by Central American asylum seekers, as well as attempts to right those wrongs through litigation, legislation, and the creation of Temporary Protected Status (TPS). Next, this Article identifies the predominant push and pull factors driving Central American refugees north—and the U.S. role in creating them. The Article then lays out the impact …

Immigration Unilateralism And American Ethnonationalism, Robert L. Tsai

Faculty Scholarship

This paper arose from an invited symposium on "Democracy in America: The Promise and the Perils," held at Loyola University Chicago School of Law in Spring 2019. The essay places the Trump administration’s immigration and refugee policy in the context of a resurgent ethnonationalist movement in America as well as the constitutional politics of the past. In particular, it argues that Trumpism’s suspicion of foreigners who are Hispanic or Muslim, its move toward indefinite detention and separation of families, and its disdain for so-called “chain migration” are best understood as part of an assault on the political settlement of the …

Immigration Detainers, Local Discretion, And State Law's Historical Constraints, Kate Evans

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Defending Refugees: A Case For Protective Procedural Safeguards In The Persecutor Bar Analysis, Charles Shane Ellison

Faculty Scholarship

For refugees and asylum seekers, application of the so-called persecutor bar is tantamount to a death sentence. However, the Board of Immigration Appeals -- without any real deliberation--has arrived at an interpretation of a generic-relief, burdenshifting regulation to allow for application of the persecutor bar based upon very little evidence. Even mere membership in a group with a poor human rights record has been held sufficient to switch the burden of proof and apply the bar. While the recent holding of Matter of Negusie, 27 I&N Dec. 347 (June 28, 2018) can be read and understood largely as a victory …

The Sanctuary Of Prosecutorial Nullification, Zohra Ahmed

Faculty Scholarship

In the aftermath of the 2016 election, the shortcomings of existing sanctuary protections came sharply into focus.¹ Historically, cities enacted sanctuary protections to extricate their law enforcement agencies from activities related to federal immigration enforcement. In sanctuary cities, local government agencies are typically restricted from sharing information with federal immigration authorities or from cooperating in apprehending individuals targeted for removal. ² After the White House issued an Executive Order (EO) in late January 2017, many immigrant rights advocates recognized that external facing policies that proscribed direct cooperation would not suffice. ³ The EO announced that Immigration and Customs Enforcement …

Free Trade, Immigrant Workers, And Employment Discrimination, Angela D. Morrison

Faculty Scholarship

This article reframes the outward-looking perspective on workers’ rights provisions in free trade agreements. It argues that those provisions provide an opportunity to reinforce the workplace rights of noncitizen workers in the United States. Scholars and worker advocates have criticized recent free trade agreements for their lack of enforcement mechanisms and protections for workers in developing countries. They argue that this has encouraged a race to the bottom on the part of multi-national corporations who relocate to developing countries to take advantage of cheap labor costs, thereby costing U.S. workers’ jobs.

This article shifts the focus. Instead, it argues that …

Assessing The Impact Of The Global Compacts On Refugees And Migration In The Middle East, Susan M. Akram

Faculty Scholarship

Today, the overwhelming burden of the global refugee and migrant crisis is borne by the Middle East region, driven by protracted armed conflict and exacerbated by a deficit of applicable international legal norms. Most States in the Middle East have not adopted the international treaties that provide protection guarantees for refugees and stateless persons, the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol, the 1954 Convention on the Status of Stateless Persons, and the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness. The lack of legal status for persons displaced by conflict, many of whom are stateless refugees, leaves them in situations …

Eroding Immigration Exceptionalism: Administrative Law In The Supreme Court's Immigration Jurisprudence, Kate Aschenbrenner

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Search For Protection For Stateless Refugees In The Middle East: Palestinians And Kurds In Lebanon And Jordan, Susan M. Akram

Faculty Scholarship

Most Arab countries have not ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention/1967 Protocol or the 1954 Convention on the Status of Stateless Persons, and the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness has no ratifications in the Middle East. While regional conventions dealing with refugees in the Arab world have been developed, they have been honoured primarily in the breach. Further, many Arab countries do not have domestic laws governing the status of refugees or stateless persons per se, but have applied ad hoc policies to the waves of refugees that have entered and stayed – some for decades – in …

Kunm Interviews Jennifer Moore About Refugees, Asylum, And International Law, Jennifer Moore

Faculty Scholarship

How The U.S. Ignores Immigration And Asylum Laws, by Megan Kamerick. Immigrant. Refugee. Asylum. These are words we’ve been hearing a lot this year. But what are the laws around refugees in the United States and internationally and is the U.S. following its legal obligations? On this episode of University Showcase, we talk with Professor Jennifer Moore. She's an expert on refugee law and teaches it at UNM. Moore co-authored one of the first law school text books on refugee law. Prior to joining UNM in 1995, she worked with the United Nations High Commission on Refugees in West Africa …