Stacy Brustin, Regulation of Non-Immigrant Birth Tourism – Safety Imperative or Political Pretext? CLE Paper for American Bar Association, Family Law Section, October 2020.
Ms. Brustin is the Director of the Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Clinic of Columbus Community Legal Services, the Columbus School of Law's on-campus clinical education program. She supervises students engaged in litigation, limited assistance, and policy reform on behalf of immigrants and refugees in D.C. and Virginia. She also has expertise in family law and public benefits matters.A Vision Forward: Policies Needed to Protect the Best Interest of “Category 4” Unaccompanied Immigrant Children, Principal Author, Justice for Immigrants Campaign, U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops June 2021 available at https://justiceforimmigrants.org/a-vision-forward-uac/.
Kaitlin Ann Coyle, Particularly Abused: Closing the Backdoor on Certifiably Deniable Particular Social Group Asylum Claims, 19 Ave Maria L. Rev. 179 (2021)
Asylum protection was not created to be an easy path to U.S. Citizenship, nor was it intended to be a means for undocumented individuals to stay in the country for long periods of time. Rather, its purpose was to offer safety to those fleeing persecution on account of a protected ground. The current practice of adjudicating PSG claims that blatantly fail to meet the necessary elements of asylum law at the forefront must change. These PSG claims have the practical effect of backing up the courts, undercutting the viability of aliens with real claims, and ultimately financially stripping the alien of any money earned in the U.S. The legislature must close this loophole by implementing a higher credible fear standard at the border and taking action to combat attorney abuse. While it is impossible to change the pull effect the U.S. has on many immigrants, the spirit of the law demands recognition of the detrimental and overwhelming effect meritless PSG claims have on immigration courts. Congress must close the backdoor on certifiably deniable PSG asylum claims, while protecting the immigrant, in order to correct the overcrowded, abused, and broken system before it is too late.
Cindy Izquierdo, Not Your Average Summer Camp: Children in Immigration Detention, 22 Scholar: St. Mary's L. Rev. & Soc. Just. 101 (2020)
Plagued by a decade long civil war, funded by the United States government, the United States was a main contributor to the violence that engendered the deaths and displacement of many Salvadorans.2 Post-war, a massive and catastrophic wave of prolonged gang violence erupted in the streets of El Salvador.3 The United States was amid the plight of displaced Central American immigrants all along; from contributing billions to corrupt Central American governments, to firearm trafficking, and arming the criminal syndicates that commit violent crimes against children.4 ....12 Deportations further gang behavior because one contributing factor is America's demand for illegal drugs--a lucrative business that entices gang members.13
Jerome Perez, Heirs of an Administration: Unlawful Executive Actions, 71 Cath. U.L. Rev. 405, (2022)
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. Now, when a President acts unlawfully through their administrative agencies, subsequent Presidents who wish to uphold their constitutional obligation and reverse those prior actions has to plea to the Supreme Court and satisfy the APA's arbitrary and capricious standard. Chief Justice Roberts, who wrote the DHS v. Regents opinion, held that the rescission of DACA by the Trump administration was reviewable and also arbitrary and capricious against the APA but failed to consider the illegality of DACA in the Court's analysis.
This note illustrates the illegality of DACA utilizing the Texas v. United States case that imposed the injunction on DAPA, juxtaposing the two policies. The note recommences with an analysis of DHS v. Regents revealing why the ruling is contrary to the Constitution, Immigration Nationality Act, Homeland Security Act, and the APA. Lastly, the note reveals the ramifications of the Regents' holding, citing the Trump administration's twist on midnight rulemaking.
Gabriel Sáenz, America's Second-Class Children: An Examination of President Trump's Immigration Policies on Migrant Children and Inquiry on Justice Through the Catholic Perspective, 22 Scholar: St. Mary's L. Rev. & Soc. Just. 143 (2020)
We already have the building blocks to establish and codify a universal Just Standard that will protect all children, regardless of immigration status, and is rooted in the strong foundation of Natural Law.368 Together, we can ensure Justice for thousands of immigrant children. For we do not have an illegal immigration problem but a humanitarian crisis.369 I believe it is time for the greatest nation in the world--the United States of America--to become that beacon of light for the world again.
