Berkeley La Raza Law Journal最新文献

U.S. Border Patrol's Policy of Extrajudicial Killing 美国边境巡逻队的法外杀戮政策

Berkeley La Raza Law Journal Pub Date : 2018-05-18 DOI: 10.15779/Z3KS6J48B

Steve D. Shadowen

引用次数: 1

Immigration Law's Due Process Deficit and the Persistence of Plenary Power 移民法律的正当程序缺陷与权力至上的坚持

Berkeley La Raza Law Journal Pub Date : 2018-05-18 DOI: 10.15779/Z38HQ3RZ6W

C. Rosenbaum

{"title":"Immigration Law's Due Process Deficit and the Persistence of Plenary Power","authors":"C. Rosenbaum","doi":"10.15779/Z38HQ3RZ6W","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38HQ3RZ6W","url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 119 I. Detention of Asylum Seekers ............................................................................... 120 II. Substantive Due Process Rights of Noncitizens ................................................. 125 A. Zadvydas v. Davis and Clark v. Martinez ............................................ 126 1. Zadvydas v. Davis ......................................................................... 126 2. Clark v. Martinez ........................................................................... 128 B. Rodriguez-Fernandez v. Wilkinson ..................................................... 129 C. Demore v. Kim .................................................................................... 130 D. Jennings v. Rodriguez .......................................................................... 132 III. R.I.L-R—Substantive Due Process Asylum Seekers—Immigration Detention Cannot Be Punishment ................................................................ 138 IV. Non-Immigration Civil and Criminal Preventive Detention ............................. 141 V. The Plenary Power Doctrine and Systemic Racial Bias—Asylum Seekers in Detention ..................................................................................................... 143 A. Immigration Law and History of Mistreatment of Central American and Mexican Immigrants..................................................... 143 B. The Plenary Power Doctrine’s Role in Immigration Racial Classifications ...................................................................................... 151 VI. Mainstreaming Constitutional Procedural Due Process – Disaggregation and Rule of Law .......................................................................................... 152 A. Rule of Law and Disaggregating Immigration Law Along Criminal Immigration Lines ............................................................................... 153 CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................... 156","PeriodicalId":408518,"journal":{"name":"Berkeley La Raza Law Journal","volume":"104 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121136228","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 3

Elusive Justice: Legal Redress for Killings by U.S. Border Agents 难以捉摸的正义:美国边境人员杀人的法律补救

Berkeley La Raza Law Journal Pub Date : 2017-06-08 DOI: 10.15779/Z383T9D647

R. Altholz

{"title":"Elusive Justice: Legal Redress for Killings by U.S. Border Agents","authors":"R. Altholz","doi":"10.15779/Z383T9D647","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15779/Z383T9D647","url":null,"abstract":"Since the 1990s, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents have killed approximately fifty Mexican and U.S. nationals along the U.S.-Mexico border. Many of the victims, including several teenagers, were unarmed and shot in the back. The vast majority of CBP agents have faced no criminal, civil, or disciplinary action for their conduct. This Article identifies U.S. legal doctrines, defenses, and procedures that make justice elusive for the relatives of victims. The Article argues that there is mounting legal and political pressure to hold CBP agents accountable for violence at the border and suggests that reformists look to international standards to help guide efforts to address systemic barriers to redress. \u0000To date, no civil plaintiff has prevailed at trial in a case involving a CBP killing. Courts have dismissed most federal civil claims for lack of jurisdiction or after finding the U.S. government or CBP agent has immunity. Federal legislation, specifically the Westfall Act, effectively bars state-law tort claims in this context. As for criminal charges, federal prosecutors have declined to bring charges in all cases but one and the few state prosecutions have rarely resulted in a guilty verdict. \u0000There is, however, mounting legal and political pressure to hold CBP agents accountable for border killings. In 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to decide whether the U.S. Constitution protects foreign nationals killed in foreign territory by CBP agents. The U.S. Department of Justice recently brought criminal charges against a CBP agent for a border killing for the first time in the CBP’s nearly 100-year history. The Mexican government is also investigating multiple deaths and issued an arrest warrant for a CBP agent who killed an unarmed Mexican teenager. In addition, international human rights bodies have denounced the United States for use of excessive force and the failure to track or adequately investigate border deaths. \u0000This Article discusses doctrines and defenses such as sovereign and qualified immunity, extraterritoriality, and the Westfall Act that have led to the dismissal of civil suits and the closing of criminal investigations without pursuing charges. But legal doctrines do not alone explain the lack of accountability—institutional policies and practices also play a critical role. This Article argues that international human rights standards reveal how far U.S. law enforcement has strayed from global standards in preventing the excessive use of force and serves as a guide to identify and address the systemic barriers to redress faced by victims’ families.","PeriodicalId":408518,"journal":{"name":"Berkeley La Raza Law Journal","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130476979","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Creating a More Perfect Union: How Congress Can Rebuild the Voting Rights Act 创建一个更完美的联邦:国会如何重建投票权法案

Berkeley La Raza Law Journal Pub Date : 2017-05-09 DOI: 10.15779/Z38V97ZR67

A. A. Gonzalez

{"title":"Creating a More Perfect Union: How Congress Can Rebuild the Voting Rights Act","authors":"A. A. Gonzalez","doi":"10.15779/Z38V97ZR67","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38V97ZR67","url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................66 I.THE EVOLUTION OF VOTING RIGHTS ...................................................69 A. Segregationist Resistance ...............................................................69 B. Landmark Events that Paved the Way for the VRA ......................70 1. Continued Southern Opposition ..............................................70 2. Bloody Sunday ........................................................................70 3. Public’s Response and President Johnson’s Renewed Push for the VRA ...................................................................................71 II.THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT OF 1965 ........................................................71 A. The Interplay between Section 4(b) and Section 5 ........................72 B. The Impact of the VRA ..................................................................73 III.SHELBY: A BLOW TO THE HEART OF THE VRA .................................74 A. The Court’s Invalidation of the Section 4(b) Coverage Formula ..76 B. Post-Shelby Implications: The Reenactment of Discriminatory Voter Laws .....................................................................................78 IV.THE MYTH OF VOTER FRAUD ...............................................................78 V.THE IMPACT OF VOTER ID LAWS: SECOND-GENERATION VOTING BARRIERS ............................................................................................80 VI.THE LIMITATIONS OF SECTION 2 LITIGATION IN THE POSTSHELBY ERA AND THE FULFILLMENT OF THE DOJ’S PROPHECY ...........................................................................................82 A. State Voting Laws after Shelby .....................................................84 VII.FINDING SOLUTIONS IN THE POST-SHELBY ERA ............................86 A. Expand the Power of the Courts to Grant Preliminary Injunctions for Section 2 Claims .......................................................................87 B. Create a Federal Commission to Conduct Nationwide Empirical Studies on the Impact of Voter ID Laws on Racial Minorities ......89 C. Amend Section 2 to Include a New Plaintiff-Friendly Three-Prong Disparate Effect Standard. .............................................................90 CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................92","PeriodicalId":408518,"journal":{"name":"Berkeley La Raza Law Journal","volume":"686 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122700702","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abuse-in(g) the System: How Accusations of U Visa Fraud and Brady Disclosures Perpetuate Further Violence Against Undocumented Victims of Domestic Abuse 滥用(g)系统:U签证欺诈指控和布雷迪披露如何使家庭暴力的无证受害者继续遭受暴力

Berkeley La Raza Law Journal Pub Date : 2017-05-09 DOI: 10.15779/Z38028PD1C

I. Mankin

引用次数: 0

Playing the Trump Card: The Enduring Legacy of Racism in Immigration Law 打特朗普牌:移民法中种族主义的持久遗产

Berkeley La Raza Law Journal Pub Date : 2016-05-09 DOI: 10.15779/Z38TG3V

D. Oppenheimer, Swati Prakash, R. Burns

{"title":"Playing the Trump Card: The Enduring Legacy of Racism in Immigration Law","authors":"D. Oppenheimer, Swati Prakash, R. Burns","doi":"10.15779/Z38TG3V","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38TG3V","url":null,"abstract":"As this Article goes to press in spring of 2016, Donald Trump is the leading candidate for the Republican nomination for President of the United States. He has built his campaign on promises to build a wall on the United States-Mexico border to prevent illegal immigration; to deport all of the estimated twelve million Mexican immigrants who are not legally authorized to live in the United States; to prohibit Syrian refugees from entering the U.S.; and to exclude all Muslims who are not U.S. citizens from entering the country. While many complain that these views violate our history of welcoming immigrants and visitors of all races, creeds, and colors, a historical examination reveals that from its beginnings, racism and xenophobia have been a driving force behind immigration law in the United States.To understand immigration law in the United States, one must thus examine the history of racial exclusion and inequality. From the formation of the Republic, our immigration laws have reflected racist policies toward various and changing racial, ethnic, and religious minority groups. Today, anti-immigrant hysteria is directed largely at immigrants from Mexico and, increasingly, at Muslims or those associated (correctly or not) with Islam, especially immigrants from the Middle East and South Asia. One question that emerges is whether Mexican immigrants will follow the same patterns of assimilation or integration as past groups of immigrants, or whether they will join Black Americans as long-standing second-class citizens.","PeriodicalId":408518,"journal":{"name":"Berkeley La Raza Law Journal","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128134317","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 14

A Demographic History of Federal Judicial Appointments by Sex and Race: 1789–2016 按性别和种族划分的联邦司法任命的人口统计学历史:1789-2016

Berkeley La Raza Law Journal Pub Date : 2016-05-09 DOI: 10.15779/Z38D287

Jonathan Stubbs

{"title":"A Demographic History of Federal Judicial Appointments by Sex and Race: 1789–2016","authors":"Jonathan Stubbs","doi":"10.15779/Z38D287","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38D287","url":null,"abstract":"I. Historical Overview ................................................................................................ 96 A. Relevant Constitutional Provisions ........................................................ 96 B. The Judiciary Act of 1789 ...................................................................... 97 C. Presidential Appointments of Federal Judges ........................................ 99 1. George Washington to Herbert Hoover ........................................... 99 2. The Initial Desegregation by Race and Sex of Federal Courts of General Jurisdiction: Franklin Roosevelt to Jimmy Carter ........ 101 3. Slow Progress in Federal Judicial Desegregation: Jimmy Carter to Barack Obama ................................................................. 106 D. Data Summary ...................................................................................... 109 II. The Myth and Substance of Federal Judicial Diversity ....................................... 113 A. Diversity Mythology ............................................................................. 113 B. Sotomayor’s Unanswered Question ..................................................... 119 C. A Preliminary Assessment .................................................................... 124 1. Process Concerns ............................................................................ 125 2. Qualitative Queries ......................................................................... 126","PeriodicalId":408518,"journal":{"name":"Berkeley La Raza Law Journal","volume":"122 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132462715","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 24

Justice Delayed is Justice Denied: The Real Significance of Matter of A-R-C-G- 延迟的正义就是否定的正义:A-R-C-G-物质的真正意义

Berkeley La Raza Law Journal Pub Date : 2016-05-09 DOI: 10.15779/Z380V97

G. Corrales

{"title":"Justice Delayed is Justice Denied: The Real Significance of Matter of A-R-C-G-","authors":"G. Corrales","doi":"10.15779/Z380V97","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15779/Z380V97","url":null,"abstract":"Introduction ............................................................................................................... 71 I.The Particular Social Group Requirement .............................................................. 73 II.The Board’s Evolving Treatment of Women as a Particular Social Group ........... 74 A. The Complexities of the Particular Social Group Requirement ............. 74 B. The Board’s New Treatment of Women as a Particular Social Group in Matter of A-R-C-G................................................................ 76 III.A Critique of the Board’s New Treatment of Domestic Violence Asylum Claims ............................................................................................................ 78 A. Inconsistency with Domestic and International Legal Norms ............... 78 1. The Federal Courts .......................................................................... 78 2. The Department of Justice ............................................................... 80 3. Other Countries: Canada and the United Kingdom ......................... 80 4. Other International Sources ............................................................. 81 a. 1951 Convention, the 1967 Protocol, and the Refugee Act of 1980 ..................................................................................... 81 b. UNHCR Interpretive Guidance for a Gendered “Particular Social Group” ........................................................................... 82 B. Insensitivity to Domestic Realities ........................................................ 84 C. Irrelevance of “Floodgate” Concern ...................................................... 86 1. Asylum Law was Designed for Massive Groups of People ............ 86 2. What About the Other Requirements to Receive Asylum? ............. 87 3. Where is the Flood? ......................................................................... 88 D. The IJ Inconsistency Problem—Adjudicating Domestic Violence Asylum Fails Domestic-Violence Victims ............................................ 89 E. Recommendations for the Future ........................................................... 90 Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 91","PeriodicalId":408518,"journal":{"name":"Berkeley La Raza Law Journal","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128073803","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Contentious Citizenship: Undocumented Activism in the Not1More Deportation Campaign 有争议的公民身份:不再驱逐运动中的无证激进主义

Berkeley La Raza Law Journal Pub Date : 2016-05-09 DOI: 10.15779/Z38Z562

Kathryn Abrams

引用次数: 6

Prosecuting the Persecuted: How Operation Streamline and Expedited Removal Violate Article 31 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and 1967 Protocol 起诉受迫害者:精简行动和加速遣返如何违反《难民地位公约》和1967年议定书第31条

Berkeley La Raza Law Journal Pub Date : 2015-04-29 DOI: 10.15779/Z38J08V

E. Puhl

{"title":"Prosecuting the Persecuted: How Operation Streamline and Expedited Removal Violate Article 31 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and 1967 Protocol","authors":"E. Puhl","doi":"10.15779/Z38J08V","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38J08V","url":null,"abstract":"Article 31 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees (Convention) and 1967 Protocol (Protocol) prohibit party States from imposing criminal penalties on refugees for illegal entry or presence in the country to which they have fled. The United States, which ratified the 1967 Protocol, does just this under Operation Streamline, which prosecutes individuals who cross the U.S.-Mexico border without authorization. This prosecution not only subjects refugees to criminal penalties and jail time, but also bars refugees from eligibility to seek full asylum in the United States due to being removed after serving a federal sentence. Because Operation Streamline only operates on the Mexico-U.S. border, this procedure disproportionately affects asylum seekers from Latin American countries, especially Mexican citizens, who are often excluded from other refugee protections. This article argues that in order to conform with its obligations under the Convention, the United States should both reform Operation Streamline to strengthen detection of and protections for asylum seekers, and remove the barriers currently in place that prevent those removed under Expedited Removal from applying for asylum. In doing so, the United States will come closer to fulfilling its obligations under the Protocol and increase access to humanitarian relief for all individuals who should qualify.","PeriodicalId":408518,"journal":{"name":"Berkeley La Raza Law Journal","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121126931","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2