Immigration Law Commons^™

Shrines Of Discrimination: A Comparative Exploration Of American And Indian Approaches To Balancing Religious Freedom And Equal Rights, Sree Vedala

MC Law Review

Religious freedom and equality, foundational human rights, often clash in legal contexts, particularly when religious practices justify discriminatory actions. The U.S. judiciary has grappled with this tension, as exemplified in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission and Yeshiva University v. YU Pride Alliance. These cases reflect opposing judicial tendencies: deference to religious beliefs versus prioritization of equality. However, neither case established a clear framework for balancing these rights. This article examines India’s "essentiality test," which assesses whether a religious practice is integral to a faith, as a potential model for resolving such conflicts. By comparing U.S. and Indian …

Interesting Intersections Of Immigration And First Amendment Law, David Hudson, Maximiliano Gluzman

FIU Law Review

This essay identifies four areas of immigration law in which pressing First Amendment claims play a prominent and dominant role. The first area involves denial of admission or deportation based on pure or symbolic speech. At various times, Congress has enacted grounds of inadmissibility and deportability that squarely fall within the purview of the First Amendment. The second area involves so-called retaliatory deportations, when the government initiates or accelerates removal proceedings against a noncitizen who is in violation of immigration laws allegedly for the non-citizen’s activism, protest activity, or other First Amendment speech or expressive conduct. The third area involves …

Looking Past Manufactured Crisis Narratives: Grounded Solutions For The Border And Beyond, Monika Y. Langarica

San Diego Law Review

This Article presents a solutions-oriented approach to engaging with the complex landscape of political, legal, and humanitarian issues at the United States-Mexico border. It proceeds in three parts. Part II illustrates the counterproductive effects of the border crisis narrative in localities across the interior of the country and in recent negotiations in Washington, D.C. Part III discusses effective border interventions grounded in local expertise, including examples which demonstrate that while federal preemption forbids states from interfering with immigration enforcement, states are within their rights to enact policies and stand up efforts to improve the reception and treatment of immigrants in …

Afghan Allies In Limbo: Discrimination In The U.S. Immigration Response, Lindsay M. Harris, Yalda Royan

San Diego Law Review

After the fall of Kabul in August 2021, the U.S. government airlifted an estimated 120,000 people to safety from Afghanistan. An airlift of this scale was unprecedented, but also woefully inadequate as a solution to the Afghan humanitarian crisis. This Article, a contribution to participatory law scholarship, is written by a U.S. law professor and immigration expert and an Afghan woman evacuated from Afghanistan in 2021 and analyzes the United States’s immigration response to the Afghan humanitarian crisis following the Taliban takeover. While the United States granted humanitarian parole for two years to approximately 76,000 individuals, permitting them to enter …

V. 61-4, 2024 Masthead

San Diego Law Review

No abstract provided.

Deadly Deterrence: Border Patrol Authority, Pursuits, And Deported Witnesses, Shaw Drake

San Diego Law Review

Since 1994, the United States has perpetrated a border policy based on the idea that tougher enforcement will mean fewer people will cross the border—termed “prevention through deterrence.” But this idea has never fulfilled its stated aim and has turned into something resembling a border ideology rather than a border policy based in fact and reality. The results have been deadly.

This Article examines a small slice of the results of this deadly border policy as it looks at Border Patrol vehicle pursuits and the deportation of those who witness Border Patrol misconduct. It also provides an overview of the …

Fentanyl, Narco-Terrorism, And National Security Politics, J. Richard Broughton

San Diego Law Review

This Article examines the use of a counterterrorism model to attack the fentanyl crisis. Rather than advocate for or against such a model, this Article envisions what employing a counterterrorism model against international drug traffickers would look like. Noting the dimensions of national security politics that intersect with counter-fentanyl policy, this Article will evaluate three distinct counterterrorism approaches: (1) using criminal counterterrorism statutes in federal indictments and prosecutions; (2) designating drug trafficking organizations as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs); and (3) authorizing the use of military force against Mexican cartels. While the current state of bellicose national security politics can inform …

The Fundamental Right Of A Safe Place To Call Home: Why The United States Immigration System Needs To Reform Its Response To Humanitarian Crises, Mackenzie Biles

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

As part of its overall aim to identify how the United States can more proactively intervene in humanitarian crises, this article will examine the Department of Homeland Security’s role in securing the safe arrival of migrants into the United States and helping them to thrive thereafter, using the crisis in Afghanistan as a lens. Part I outlines the U.S. involvement in Afghanistan and the events culminating in the 2021 military withdrawal, while seeking to remain mindful of this history’s complexity and nuance. Part II examines existing U.S. immigration mechanisms, with a focus on humanitarian parole, and critiques their inadequacy in …

The Next Chapter Of Consular Nonreviewability: Muñoz V. U.S. Dep’T Of State, 50 F.4th 906 (9th Cir. 2022), Bryan Gilbert-Overland

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Cancellation Of Removal For Inadmissible Non-Citizens, Anna Vanbuskirk

Law Student Works

Cancellation of removal is a defensive application for non-citizens in immigration removal proceedings. It is often colloquially referred to as “42B cancellation of removal” based on the form number of the associated application. This Pathfinder research guide provides an overview of cancellation of removal for inadmissible non-citizens. Those who satisfy the criteria in INA § 240A(b)(1) and successfully petition an immigration judge for 42B cancellation of removal are eligible for adjustment of status to lawful permanent residence.

This guide navigates the researcher through an overview of the cancellation of removal criteria and how to find the relevant federal statutes, applicable …

Parole Under Ina 212(D)(5)(A): Balancing Humanitarian Needs And Legal Boundaries, Jorge Miguel Magdaniel Manzur

Immigration Law Blog

This article examines how various uses and interpretations of parole under INA § 212(d)(5) have shaped immigrants' access to benefits, highlighting the balance between executive discretion and statutory limits within recent political and humanitarian contexts.

The Equal Protection Case Against Disparate U.S. Humanitarian Parole Policies For Afghans Compared To Ukrainians, Darcy Gallego

Fordham Law Review

The disparities between the U.S. government’s use of humanitarian parole in response to the humanitarian crises in Afghanistan and Ukraine are indicative of discrimination and violate the Equal Protection Clause. As such, U.S.-based relatives of Afghans should prevail in seeking accountability for the thousands of Afghans who continue to wait for protection.

First, this Note explains what immigration parole is, provides an overview of standing, equal protection, and animus, and describes how the government has used parole for Afghans and Ukrainians. Second, it compares parole for Afghans and Ukrainians and discusses recent immigration equal protection challenges. Third, it demonstrates that …

No Conozco A Ninguna Miranda Y Quiero Mi Abogado: The Constitutional Inadequacies Of Translated “Miranda Cards” In Police Interrogations, Sean Werkheiser

University of Miami Inter-American Law Review

This article explores the challenges and complexities surrounding the application of the Miranda warning in the United States and specifically addresses its impact on non– English–speaking immigrants. While many Americans are familiar with these rights, recent immigrants may not fully understand them, particularly if they come from countries that do not offer equivalent legal protections. This article performs a comparative analysis of the right to silence and counsel in Cuba, Haiti, and Colombia—three countries with the largest immigrant populations in Miami, FL. Furthermore, this article examines how Miami-Dade Police address the linguistic barriers inherent in translated “Miranda Cards,” and argues …

With Fear, Favor, And Flawed Analysis: Decision-Making In The U.S, Immigration Courts, Karen Musalo, Anna O. Law, Annie P. Daher, Katharine Donato, Chelsea Meinders

Publications and Research

Immigration judges (IJs), housed within the Executive Office for Immigration Review within the Department of Justice (DOJ), make decisions in asylum and withholding claims, which are life or death matters. And although their title is “judge,” IJs are DOJ attorneys who lack independence and are par- ticularly susceptible to political pressures. Federal court judges and scholars alike have criticized the quality and fairness of IJ decision-making, and many studies have been carried out to better understand the factors that impact it. The prior studies have relied principally on quantitative data because IJ decisions are not publicly available or searchable in …

Strangers To The Algorithm: The Effects Of Algorithmic Decision-Making In Removal Proceedings On Due Process Rights, Otoniel Ramos

Undergraduate Research Symposium Podium Presentations

This paper investigates the impact of algorithmic decision-making tools on due process rights, particularly within immigration removal proceedings. Deviating from prior studies, which primarily focused on various measures of fairness or the long-term racial stratification as a consequence of these tools, this research emphasizes the implications for due process—a fundamental legal principle enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. By examining ICE's use of these tools between July 2012 (when they were adopted) and October 2016, the study reveals the ways algorithmic input may inadvertently erode principles of procedural justice, especially adjudicatorial independence, in a setting where the rights of non-citizens are …

Immigration: Ancient Counterparts And Processes, Monica Souza Sue

Undergraduate Research Symposium Posters

This project sought to inspect parallels between modern and ancient societies, and the commonality of certain events and political markers. This project makes mentions of power dynamics, the position of immigrants as a source of labor, and their commodification as a force. Research used a 'compilation of materials' method. In which, is performed the examination and studying of different materials in relation to the question, compiling findings, and crafting commentary based on the discoveries of the medias. The experiences of immigrants in the United States are strongly comparable to the experiences of metic (immigrant) women in ancient Athens. A small …

The Future Of Immigrant Rights, Center For Rights And Justice, Benjamin N. Cardozo School Of Law

2024–2025 Flyers

No abstract provided.

Accommodating Incompetency In Immigration Court, Elizabeth Jordan

Northwestern University Law Review

In criminal law, an individual must be deemed competent to stand trial, yet our immigration courts routinely order the deportation of incompetent noncitizens. A removal proceeding against a noncitizen—where an outcome of deportation often risks life-threatening harm—continues apace even if the noncitizen has been deemed incompetent by the immigration judge. In place of halting proceedings, the immigration judge imposes “safeguards” pursuant to a provision of the immigration code that neither defines nor explains the term. In practice, judges’ application of the term “safeguards” is often absurd. The implications of continuing a proceeding against a noncitizen with a disability affecting competency …

With Fear, Favor, And Flawed Analysis: Decision-Making In U.S. Immigration Courts, Karen B. Musalo Prof.

Faculty Scholarship

Immigration judges (IJs), housed within the Executive Office for Immigration Review within the Department of Justice (DOJ), make decisions in asylum and withholding claims, which are life or death matters. And although their title is “judge,” IJs are DOJ attorneys who lack independence and are particularly susceptible to political pressures. Federal court judges and scholars alike have criticized the quality and fairness of IJ decision-making, and many studies have been carried out to better understand the factors that impact it. The prior studies have relied principally on quantitative data because IJ decisions are not publicly available or searchable in any …

The Troubling Case(S) Of Noncitizens: Immigration Enforcement Through The Criminal Justice System And The Effect On Families, Juan C. Quevedo

Tennessee Journal of Law and Policy

No abstract provided.