Immigration Law Commons^™

America’S Hidden Citizens: The Untold Stories Of The Unconscionable Deportations Of Its International Adoptees, Halley Cody

Seattle University Law Review

This Note addresses how the U.S. should rectify the harms it has perpetrated on non-citizen adoptees by amending the current deportation statutes to prevent their deportation. Part I addresses the history of adoption in the U.S. and related effects on immigration law. Part II highlights the stories of Adam Crapser and Philip Clay, who were adopted by American families who failed to naturalize them as minors, and who were subsequently deported after they sustained criminal records. Part III examines the policy goals behind deportation as a consequence of criminal convictions, as well as remedies instituted to prevent unwarranted deportation and …

Beyond Legal Deserts: Access To Counsel For Immigrants Facing Removal, Emily Ryo, Reed Humphrey

Faculty Scholarship

Removal proceedings are high-stakes adversarial proceedings in which immigration judges must decide whether to allow immigrants who allegedly have violated U.S. immigration laws to stay in the United States or to order them deported to their countries of origin. In these proceedings, the government trial attorneys prosecute noncitizens who often lack English fluency, economic resources, and familiarity with our legal system. Yet, most immigrants in removal proceedings do not have legal representation, as removal is considered to be a civil matter and courts have not recognized a right to government­appointed counsel for immigrants facing removal. Advocates, policymakers, and scholars have …

The Immigration Implications Of Presidential Pot Pardons, Jason A. Cade

Scholarly Works

This Essay examines the immigration implications of President Joe Biden’s Proclamation on October 6, 2022, pardoning most federal and D.C. offenders who committed the offense of simple marijuana possession. A late twentieth century interpretive shift by the Board of Immigration Appeals holds that pardons only prevent deportation for certain criminal history categories, which do not include controlled substance offenses, and thus far lower federal courts have deferred to the agency’s approach.Nevertheless, according to the analysis I offer, President Biden’s cannabis pardons should be deemed fully effective to eliminate all immigration penalties. All of the immigrant pardon cases to reach the …

Regional Immigration Enforcement, Fatma Marouf

Faculty Scholarship

Regional disparities in immigration enforcement have existed for decades, yet they remain largely overlooked in immigration law scholarship. This Article theorizes that bottom-up pressure from states and localities, combined with top-down pressures and policies established by the President, produce these regional disparities. The Article then provides an empirical analysis demonstrating enormous variations in how Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s twenty-four field offices engage in federal enforcement around the United States. By analyzing data related to detainers, arrests, removals, and detention across these field offices, the Article demonstrates substantial differences between field offices located in sanctuary and anti-sanctuary regions, as well as …

Acts Of Justice: Restoring Justice For Immigrants Through State Pardons, Sadie M. Casamenti

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Issues Of Right To Legal Counsel In Immigrant Removal Proceedings: Due Process Framework And Applicability, Cambria A. Judd Babbitt

Honors Projects

Immigration removal proceedings suffer from a lack of procedural due process protections for non-citizens facing deportation charges. This research examines constitutional due process framework, what it entails, and how it is to be fairly applied to non-citizens in the United States. Special attention is paid to ways the immigration court system is subject to unjust and biased procedures that make it difficult for immigrants to succeed in their removal cases. The main focus of this study is on the importance of direct legal representation in removal proceedings to support non-citizens and keep courts accountable for upholding the due process of …

The Mother Of Exiles Is Abandoning Her Children: The Systemic Failure To Protect Unaccompanied Minors Arriving At Our Borders, Rosa M. Peterson

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

Unaccompanied minors arrive at the United States border every day. Many brought by the hope of finding a life lived without fear, a luxury many United States citizens take for granted. Their truths become the barriers and shackles which keep them in detention centers and unaccompanied minor facilities throughout the United States; children find their very words wielded as weapons against them in immigration court. Words often spoken to therapists in perceived confidence, during counseling sessions. This practice is a systemic failure to protect unaccompanied minors arriving at our borders who are seeking protection and help. The United States …

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 …

Overstepping: U.S. Immigration Judges And The Power To Develop The Record, Jayanth K. Krishnan

Articles by Maurer Faculty

In 1952, Congress established a new federal position to be filled by “special inquiry officers” charged with overseeing deportation cases. These immigration judges—as they eventually came to be called—were assigned to work within the executive branch, namely, the Department of Justice, and they were to be answerable ultimately to a political appointee, the attorney general. Importantly, they received specific statutory authority allowing them to “develop the record” during an immigration case. This power enabled immigration judges to assemble evidence and call, “interrogate, examine, and cross‑examine . . . any witnesses.”

Given that many immigrants who appear in immigration court do …

Fear Foreigners, And Free Expression: A Brief Reflection On Ideological Exclusion And Deportation In The United States, Julia Rose Kraut

Georgia Law Review

“Why should we be afraid of this man and his ideas?” asked Secretary of State William P. Rogers, referring to Belgian, Marxist economist Ernest Mandel.1 In 1969, Mandel applied for a nonimmigrant visa to visit the United States after receiving invitations to speak at several American colleges and universities, including Amherst College, Columbia University, Princeton University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and the New School for Social Research.2 Mandel had received visas to visit the United States twice before: one in 1962 and another in 1968.3 Yet, this time, Mandel’s application for a visa was denied.4

The State Department informed Mandel …

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

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Abdication Through Enforcement, Shalini Ray

Indiana Law Journal

Presidential abdication in immigration law has long been synonymous with the perceived nonenforcement of certain provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act. President Obama’s never-implemented policy of deferred action, known as DAPA, serves as the prime example in the literature. But can the President abdicate the duty of faithful execution in immigration law by enforcing the law, i.e., by deporting deportable noncitizens? This Article argues “yes.” Every leading theory of the presidency recognizes the President’s role as supervisor of the bureaucracy, an idea crystallized by several scholars. When the President fails to establish meaningful enforcement priorities, essentially making every deportable …

An Economic And Political Lens Into The Lives Of Undocumented Migrant Female-Headed Households, Fátima V. Preciado Mendoza

University Honors Theses

Mexican undocumented women are essential in migrating in many households; they are often at the center of sustaining immigrant networks (Caroline B. Brettell 2015). The purpose of this study is to document, analyze, and report on the sociopolitical climate concerning the federal immigration detention and deportation pursued by the Trump regime and its effect on the mental health and financial well-being of undocumented migrant mothers working in Oregon. Throughout the interviewed data analysis process, the study examines the critical role women play in building community and navigating through multiple state social services and programs as a means of self-empowerment. This …

Weighing Pain: How The Harm Of Immigration Detention Must Be Factored In Custody Decisions, Linus Chan

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

The United States is currently in the midst of a “third wave of potential pretrial detention reform.” And while certain reforms are gaining traction in an effort to reduce pretrial criminal detention, efforts to do the same for immigration detention have lagged. Reformers and abolitionists make the case that immigration detention needs to be either restricted or eliminated entirely. Nonetheless, the number of people held in detention for immigration purposes rises year after year. Not only do the numbers of people in immigration detention grow, but the systems in place have grown less concerned with the harsh consequences of detention …

Racially Biased Policing Practices In The United States Creates A High Risk Of Deportation For Immigrants, Kiley Barnard

Immigration and Human Rights Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Taxonomy Of The Hardships Children Of Immigrant Parents Face Following Parental Deportation And Recommendations To Protect The Children’S Rights, Heather Sanborn

Chicago-Kent Law Review

No abstract provided.

Family In The Balance: Barton V. Barr And The Systematic Violation Of The Right To Family Life In U.S. Immigration Enforcement, David Baluarte

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

The United States systematically violates the international human right to family life in its system of removal of noncitizens. Cancellation of removal provides a means for noncitizens to challenge their removal based on family ties in the United States, but Congress has placed draconian limits on the discretion of immigration courts to cancel removal where noncitizens have committed certain crimes. The recently issued U.S. Supreme Court decision in Barton v. Barr illustrates the troubling trend of affording less discretion for immigration courts to balance family life in removal decisions that involve underlying criminal conduct. At issue was the “stop-time rule” …

Discretionary Injustice: Limiting Due Process Rights Of Undocumented Immigrants Upon Removal After Re-Entry, Brendan Dauscher

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The End Of Deportation, Angélica Cházaro

Articles

This Article introduces to legal scholarship a new horizon for pro-immigrant scholarship and advocacy: deportation abolition. The ever-present threat of deportation shapes the daily lives of noncitizens. Instead of aiming for a pathway to citizenship, most noncitizens must now contend with dodging the many pathways to banishment. Despite growing threats to immigrant survival, most pro-immigrant scholarship and advocacy that aims to reduce migrant suffering assumes deportation as inevitable. The focus remains on improving individual outcomes by aligning the process of deportation with due process and the rule of law. But considered from the point of view of those facing deportation, …

Deported Veterans: The Unintended Consequences Of “Good Moral Character”, Jonathan Deras

Master's Theses

The purpose of this research is to argue that U.S. immigration policy, specifically the 1996 IIRIRA (also known as IIRAIRA), needs to change regarding the legal treatment of immigrant U.S. military veteran deportees due to the following concepts. The first concept is to articulate how the criminalization of immigration, and how the military system intersects to facilitate the Deportation of U.S veterans. A key concept in this analysis is the standard of “good moral character” set by the U.S. government that enlistees need to meet to be accepted into the military; this standard is also used against immigrant veterans during …

Is The U.S. Government Violating The Safe Conducts Of Noncitizens? How A Turn To Strict Originalism Could Revitalize The Alien Tort Statute, Gabe Cahn

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Arbitrary Arbiters: Evaluating The Right To Be Informed Of Eligibility For Discretionary Relief In Removal Proceedings, Michael Jordan

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

A Suspended Death Sentence: Habeas Review Of Expedited Removal Decisions, Lauren Schusterman

Michigan Law Review

Expedited removal allows low-level immigration officers to summarily order the deportation of certain noncitizens, frequently with little to no judicial oversight. Noncitizens with legitimate asylum claims should not find themselves in expedited removal. When picked up by immigration authorities, they should be referred for a credible fear interview and then for more thorough proceedings.

Although there is clear congressional intent that asylum seekers not be subjected to expedited removal, mounting evidence suggests that expedited removal fails to identify bona fide asylum seekers. Consequently, many of them are sent back to persecution. Such decisions have weighty consequences, but they have remained …

Protecting Stateless Refugees In The United States, David Baluarte

Scholarly Articles

This article proposes a more complete and nuanced consideration of statelessness in asylum adjudication procedures in the United States and the possibility of reopening previously denied asylum claims for this purpose. The article proceeds in four parts, beginning with a discussion of statelessness in the United States. Next, the article describes the international protection frameworks for both refugees and stateless persons and identifies important points of intersection between these frameworks. Then the article argues that discriminatory denationalization that renders a person stateless triggers refugee protection, thereby making victims of such deprivation eligible for asylum in the United States. The article …

Family In The Balance: Barton V. Barr And The Systematic Violation Of The Right To Family Life In U.S. Immigration Enforcement, David Baluarte

Scholarly Articles

The United States systematically violates the international human right to family life in its system of removal of noncitizens. Cancellation of removal provides a means for noncitizens to challenge their removal based on family ties in the United States, but Congress has placed draconian limits on the discretion of immigration courts to cancel removal where noncitizens have committed certain crimes. The recently issued U.S. Supreme Court decision in Barton v. Barr illustrates the troubling trend of affording less discretion for immigration courts to balance family life in removal decisions that involve underlying criminal conduct. At issue was the “stop-time rule” …

Lawful Permanent Residency: A Potential Solution For Temporary Protected Status Holders In The Eastern District Of New York, Cody M. Gecht

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reevaluating The Adjudication Of Crimes Involving Moral Turpitude, Colleen Muñoz

Lewis & Clark Law Review

Criminalizing immigration status has tainted the lives of permanent residents in the United States for years. A minor misdemeanor conviction imposes the threat of extreme penalties for noncitizens and their continued residence in the United States. Specifically, a conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude can prevent a noncitizen from seeking admission, threaten deportation proceedings, and jeopardize his or her ability to naturalize as a United States citizen. Crimes involving moral turpitude remain undefined in the Immigration and Nationality Act, causing courts to adjudicate the crimes arbitrarily.

In the absence of statutory or administrative direction, jurisdictions across the United States …

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 …

Legislating Morality: Moral Theory And Turpitudinous Crimes In Immigration Jurisprudence, Abel Rodríguez, Jennifer A. Bulcock

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

Congress could have framed the country’s immigration policies in any number of ways. In significant part, it opted to frame them in moral terms. The crime involving moral turpitude is among the most pervasive and pernicious classifications in immigration law. In the Immigration and Nationality Act, it is virtually ubiquitous, appearing everywhere from the deportability and mandatory detention grounds to the inadmissibility and naturalization grounds. In effect, it acts as a gatekeeper for those who wish to enter and remain in the country, obtain lawful permanent residence, travel abroad after admission, or become United States citizens. With limited exceptions, noncitizens …

Pereira's Aftershocks, Lonny Hoffman

William & Mary Law Review

At the end of the 2017 term, the Supreme Court decided not to stop time. Nonpermanent residents who have been placed in removal proceedings may apply for a discretionary form of relief from the Attorney General known as “cancellation of removal.” To be eligible, an applicant must show (in addition to meeting other requirements) that she has been in the United States for at least ten consecutive years. The period of continuous physical presence is interrupted when the government serves the noncitizen with a notice to appear at a removal hearing. However, in Pereira v. Sessions, the Court held that …