District Court Jurisdiction over Non-Removal Cases
The Legal Action Center (LAC) urges a narrow interpretation of the statutory bars to review of discretionary issues in district court cases where discretionary relief may have been sought, but the cases themselves present legal or constitutional issues. This situation arises when, for example, a noncitizen seeks district court review of USCIS’s denial of an application for adjustment of status on non-discretionary grounds. This issue has become increasingly important as more noncitizens seek review of erroneous USCIS denials of applications for immigration benefits.
The LAC maintains that district courts do have jurisdiction over these cases and can review them under the Administrative Procedures Act. We argue that the bar to review of discretionary judgments found in INA § 242(a)(2)(B)(i) is inapplicable to a court’s review of non-discretionary statutory eligibility for an immigration benefit. We also argue that INA § 242(a)(2)(D) does not limit the jurisdiction of a district court to review constitutional and legal issues in a non-removal case.
Alla Barenboy v. Secretary of DHS et al., No. 10-1802 (3d Cir. amicus brief filed June 7, 2010) (court denied the petition on other grounds in a non-precedential decision).Read more...
Coan's collection of 'new beginning' stories captures the spirit of new Americans. Each story frames a different period of history but the drive, dreams, passion and pride of the subjects hasn't changed over time. Immigrants often leave so much behind in order to bring so much forward. The author organized the stories by decade and included a background of each era. With the perfect dose of history the book moves forward and the readers will feel like they get to know the storytellers. This book is the perfect companion to any educator who is teacing their students about immigration to the United States because it puts both the historic and contemporary issues of immigration into perspective.
This issue covers Child Status Protection Act litigation, a recent Supreme Court decision in a fraud offense case, a final order in a religious worker class action, a court of appeals decision finding jurisdiction to review a cancellation denial, and an update in the Orozco litigation (involving adjustment of status where the admission involved fraud or misrepresentation).
If all unauthorized immigrants were removed from Florida the state would lose $43.9 billion in economic activity, $19.5 billion in gross state product, and approximately 262,436 jobs, according to the left-leaning American Immigration Council, a research organization that studies immigrants and immigration policy.
WHEN ARIZONA lawmakers enacted legislation last year inflating the power of police officers to check immigration status when they make even routine stops, they staked out a reputation for the state as a citadel of intolerance. That was by design, for their explicit purpose was to drive away the hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants who, lured by jobs and a booming economy, had arrived in the state in the preceding 10 or 15 years.
The law, hung up by constitutional challenges, has never taken full effect. But it has had an important unintended consequence — as a wake-up call to the nation’s business community, for which a policy aimed at deporting millions of undocumented workers is economic lunacy.
Thanks largely to a backlash from business, state legislatures elsewhere have balked at adopting Arizona-style laws, though a few, particularly in the South, have passed bills designed to deny opportunities to illegal immigrants and keep them in the shadows. The business backlash is motivated partly by fears that other states could suffer Arizona’s fate: boycotts and cancellations that have meant tens of millions of dollars in lost revenue for hotels, restaurants and other businesses that rely on visitors. But businesses also fear the potential economic damage from mass deportation. A new report by the Center for American Progress and the Immigration Policy Center, groups that are sympathetic to illegal immigrants but intellectually serious, examines those costs in detail and concludes that they would be staggering.Read more...