immigration

In 1996, Congress passed the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA). This article discusses how two specific provisions of the IIRIRA - the one-year deadline on asylum applications and the expedited removal provisions - unnecessarily cause hardship and injustice to asylum-seekers. It also assesses the response of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) and suggests needed regulatory and statutory reform.

In this Article, the author exposes how Congress, by failing to protect functional families in the context of immigration law, has failed to follow human rights law in a way that is meaningful to children and that honors its own highly valued principles of family preservation. Although the paramount purpose of U.S. immigration law is not, admittedly, to protect the integrity of family, Congress does explicitly aim to do so in certain circumstances. But even where Congress aims to further family unity, it fails desperately because U.S.

This article asserts that there is a due process right to appointed counsel at government expense for non-citizens who file cases where persecution and death of the petitioner may result after removal - namely claims for asylum, relief under the Convention Against Torture, and restriction on removal. Due process protects all persons' interests in life, liberty and property, regardless of their legal status within the country. Where death may result from an erroneous denial of relief, a non-citizen's interest in life and liberty is directly implicated.