By Jonathan Hafetz

The U.S. detention center at Guantánamo Bay has long been synonymous with torture, secrecy, and the abuse of executive power. It has come to epitomize lawlessness and has sparked protracted legal battles and political debate. For too long, however, Guantánamo has been viewed in isolation and has overshadowed a larger, interconnected global detention system that includes other military prisons such as Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan, secret CIA jails, and the transfer of prisoners to other countries for torture. Guantánamo is simply—and alarmingly—the most visible example of a much larger prison system designed to operate outside the law.

Habeas Corpus after 9/11 examines the rise of the U.S.-run global detention system that emerged after 9/11 and the efforts to challenge it through habeas corpus (a petition to appear in court to claim unlawful imprisonment). Habeas expert and litigator Jonathan Hafetz gives us an insider’s view of the detention of “enemy combatants” and an accessible explanation of the complex forces that keep these systems running.

In the age of terrorism, some argue that habeas corpus is impractical and unwise. Hafetz advocates that it remains the single most important check against arbitrary and unlawful detention, torture, and the abuse of executive power

New York; London: NYU Press, 2011. 331p.

By Lara Farrell

This briefing on the experiences and drivers of exploitation for young migrant workers analyses age as a risk factor for labour exploitation, considering how it intersects with other vulnerabilities. It is based on data collected through participatory research with workers in cleaning, hospitality, and app-based deliveries, alongside existing literature, as part of a three-year project aimed at addressing the knowledge gap concerning experiences and drivers of labour abuse and exploitation in these under-researched, low-paid sectors of the economy. The focus of the briefing is on workers aged 16-24, as young people are most likely to be working in sectors with the highest levels of precarious employment, temporary jobs, and casual contracts, yet there is a lack of research and understanding of their experiences of work.

This briefing on the experiences and drivers of exploitation for young migrant workers analyses age as a risk factor for labour exploitation, considering how it intersects with other vulnerabilities. It is based on data collected through participatory research with workers in cleaning, hospitality, and app-based deliveries, alongside existing literature, as part of a three-year project aimed at addressing the knowledge gap concerning experiences and drivers of labour abuse and exploitation in these under-researched, low-paid sectors of the economy. The focus of the briefing is on workers aged 16-24, as young people are most likely to be working in sectors with the highest levels of precarious employment, temporary jobs, and casual contracts, yet there is a lack of research and understanding of their experiences of work.

London,  Focus on Labour Exploitation (FLEX). 2021, 18pg

By  Hekate Papadaki

Victims of modern slavery who are forced into criminality are frequently misunderstood and treated as criminals. In the UK it is estimated that as many as 100,000 victims are being exploited for modern slavery.1 Our report reveals a worrying picture of abuse and exploitation of vulnerable adults and even children, with criminals developing sophisticated strategies to trap victims into a cycle of exploitation. The lack of understanding amongst police and legal professionals means many victims are failing to get the support they need and this type of modern slavery is overlooked and under-reported. While this report was written prior to the onset of COVID-19, its findings are timely and important as we know that people who are vulnerable and in difficult financial predicaments are preyed on by traffickers. We know that traffickers target homeless people, including British nationals. An economic downturn will heighten the risk they face. Now more than ever, it is crucial that we support victims of modern slavery and that the police and legal professionals know how to spot the signs of abuse. And while it may have been hidden during lockdown, this type of modern slavery is on the rise. Criminal exploitation, where people are forced to undertake criminal activities such as financial fraud, sham marriages or working in the drugs trade, was only officially recognised in the UK in 2017. Yet in recent years there has been more than a 4-fold increase in cases of criminal exploitation uncovered during police operations, and it now makes up a quarter of all operations.2 At Hestia, we believe the numbers of victims are much higher than even current data shows and that cases are systematically misrecorded. So, why has this area of exploitation been hidden for so long and what are the challenges in addressing it? By reviewing the experiences of over 60 victims and interviewing 40 professionals in this field including police, solicitors and victim’s advocates some clear themes and challenges emerge.

London: Hestia. 2020, 24pg

By Alicia Heys, Craig Barlow, Carole Murphy and Amy McKee

This article offers an original contribution to the field of victimization studies by investigating the current context of, and responses to, British nationals who are victims of modern slavery in the UK (BVs). Through the examination of National Referral Mechanism and Duty to Notify statistics, a current picture of specific experiences of BVs in the UK is illustrated with reference to identification and access to support. An exploration of the reasons for non-engagement of BVs with services and the detrimental impact this may have on their recovery highlights pertinent issues of mistrust, stigma and shame. Compounded by the current criminal justice approach towards modern slavery, the effects on the well-being of victims and survivors document the barriers to accessing services. A lack of engagement with the complexity of modern slavery; a lack of knowledge, training and expertise; and a lack of comprehensive guidance result in poor outcomes for BVs. Overall, the findings of this article are important in recognizing that the needs of BVs are currently not adequately met. A comprehensive investigation is required to examine the specific needs and experiences of BVs so that responses can be improved to effectively and appropriately support them into long-term and meaningful recovery.

Journal of Victimology and Victim JusticeVolume 5, Issue 1. April 2022, 16pg

BY ROGER J. R. LEVESQUE  

In the wake of the civil rights movement, the legal system dramatically changed its response to discrimination based on race, gender, and other characteristics. It is now showing signs of yet another dramatic shift, as it moves from considering difference to focusing on neutrality. Rather than seeking to counter subjugation through special protections for groups that have been historically (and currently) disadvantaged, the Court now adopts a “colorblind” approach. Equality now means treating everyone the same way.

This book explores these shifts and the research used to support civil rights claims, particularly relating to minority youths’ rights to equal treatment. It integrates developmental theory with work on legal equality and discrimination, showing both how the legal system can benefit from new research on development and how the legal system itself can work to address invidious discrimination given its significant influence on adolescents—especially those who are racial minorities—at a key stage in their developmental life.

Adolescents, Discrimination, and the Law articulates the need to address discrimination by recognizing and enlisting the law’s inculcative powers in multiple sites subject to legal regulation, ranging from families, schools, health and justice systems to religious and community groups. The legal system may champion ideals of neutrality in the goals it sets itself for treating individuals, but it cannot remain neutral in the values it supports and imparts. This volume shows that despite the shift to a focus on neutrality, the Court can and should effectively foster values supporting equality, especially among youth.

New York; London: New York University Press, 2015. 304p.

By Tuesday Reitano and Prem Mahadevan

This brief brings together key lessons emerging from GI-TOC research on the smuggling of migrants (SOM) between 2015-23. The research emphasises (1) The need to provide sufficient opportunities for legal migration (2) The importance of timing for enforcement-led responses (3) The adaptive nature of the smuggling industry, with route changes being implemented swiftly in response to seemingly formidable obstacles to population movement.

Hostility towards migrants has increased in the aftermath of COVID-19, however drivers of migration have intensified. Regional smuggling markets and routes are consolidating under influential poly-criminals, while governments crack down on smaller players. To counter this, state intervention efforts might consider prioritising the slowing, and ideally, the reversal of this consolidation. This would require a holistic approach that addresses migrant smuggling through development interventions, over solely concentrating on interdiction measures.

Policy implications

• Legal migration prospects offer a clear boundary between lawful and unlawful entry, facilitating prompt action for those not using established channels.

• Setting up humanitarian support infrastructure along smuggling routes could help mitigate power imbalances between migrants and smugglers

• Multilateral intelligence collection states with visa-free travel arrangements between them, could use tracking to detect criminal consolidation on key routes, enabling targeted interdiction and counter-action against smuggling networks.

• Differentiating between migrant smuggling networks: standalone operations vs. career criminal groups.

• Partnering with NGOs and CSOs could help map smuggling networks, as they often have access to migrant accounts.

• Strengthening of data collation capacity within law enforcement agencies could build up a longterm evidence base to curate policy responses.

Briefing Note 28

The Hague: Serious Organised Crime & Anti-Corruption Evidence (SOC ACE), 2024. 10p.

By Donald Kerwin and Brendan Kerwin

This paper examines the staffing needs of the US Department of Justice’s Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), as it seeks to eliminate an immigration court backlog, which approached 2.5 million pending cases at the end of fiscal year (FY) 2023. A previous study by the Center for Migration Studies of New York (CMS) attributed the backlog to systemic, long-neglected problems in the broader US immigration system. This paper provides updated estimates of the number of immigration judges (IJs) and “judge teams” (IJ teams) needed to eliminate the backlog over ten and five years based on different case receipt and completion scenarios. It also introduces a data tool that will permit policymakers, administrators and researchers to make their own estimates of IJ team hiring needs based on changing case receipt and completion data. Finally, the paper outlines the pressing need for reform of the US immigration system, including a well-resourced, robust, and independent court system, particularly in light of record “encounters” of migrants at US borders in FY 2022 and 2023.

By M.  Luzes , E. Pilatowsky,  and  J. Ruiz

Over the past 20 years, migration in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) has been characterized by an increase in intraregional migration flows. Within  this  regional  migration  scenario  there  is a  misconception,  rooted  in  the  social  imaginary, that the majority of people who migrate within the continent are men. Nevertheless, women have accounted for practically half of migration flows in Latin America and the Caribbean since 1960, and their  participation  in  the  current  interregional mobility dynamics is around 50%. Even so, studies that   focus   on   understanding   the   experiences of   discrimination   women   face,   derived   from particular  stigmas  —  different  to  those  faced  by male migrants — are scarce. This   document   seeks   to   understand   these particular  experiences  from  an  intersectional perspective, exploring the perception of women migrants,  their  experiences  in  Latin  American and    Caribbean    countries,    and    how    these impact  integration  indicators. Female  migrants experience  unique  challenges,  different  to  those of  male  migrants  and  local  women,  confronting multiple  forms  of  discrimination  based  on  their gender,  country  of  origin,  migration  status,  and other   interrelated   identities.   The   aim   of   this work  is  to  delve  deeper  into  the  knowledge  that reinforces the need to address the specific barriers that  women  migrants  come  up  against  in  their integration processes, marked by prejudices and stigmas that influence the narratives about them. 

Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank (“IDB” ), 2024. 42p

By Jonathan Haggerty

  Research suggests there is little connection between immigration and crime; and, to the extent any such relationship exists, immigration reduces crime rates. One frequently cited example—an analysis of 51 studies on immigration and crime conducted between 1994 and 2014—showed that the relationship between immigration and crime is either nonexistent or negative, which means that immigration appears to reduce crime rates. Nonetheless, immigration and crime—specifically related to Latin American gang members—was a major theme of the 2016 presidential election, as opposition to immigration was fundamental to then-candidate Donald Trump’s campaign. Because much of the opposition to immigration stems from a conviction that immigrants are uniquely prone to crime, it is important to review the current evidence. This paper looks specifically at the evidence on illegal immigration and crime, as many supporters of President Trump claim to only oppose illegal immigration, and not immigration itself. There is limited research on the crime rates of illegal immigrants due to data restrictions; however, much of the current, impressive body of evidence that suggests immigrants commit crime at lower rates than native-born Americans combines data on legal and illegal immigrant populations  The most frequently cited studies specifically on illegal immigration can be divided into two categories: those looking at institutionalization rates—the rate at which a given population is arrested or incarcerated—and experimental studies measuring illegal immigration’s impact on crime rates in particular geographic areas. Both categories suggest that illegal immigrants commit crimes at lower rates than native-born citizens. Of the nineteen studies examined in this policy brief, only one suggested a higher crime rate for illegal immigrants, while the rest suggested that illegal immigrants commit fewer crimes than native-born Americans, that they have no effect on crime rates or that they decrease crime rates in areas where they settle. These findings are largely consistent with the overall empirical evidence on immigration and crime.

  R STREET SHORTS NO. 97  

Washington, DC: R Street, 2020. 4p

By Joanna Dawson 

The Government can proscribe organisations that it considers engage in or promote terrorism. When an organisation is proscribed, it becomes a criminal offence to belong to it or to support it. This briefing describes the recent history and present status of proscribed organisations under the Terrorism Act 2000. Proscription under the Terrorism Act 2000 Prior to the 2000 Act, proscription was exclusively concerned with terrorism connected with the affairs of Northern Ireland. Under the 2000 Act, proscription was extended to include organisations concerned with both domestic and international terrorism. The Home Secretary may proscribe an organisation if they believe it is “concerned in terrorism”. If the Home Secretary believes that an organisation meets this statutory test, they must then decide whether to proscribe the organisation. In doing so, they must take into account various policy considerations. Consequences of proscription The 2000 Act sets out a number of proscription offences. These include: • belonging to or inviting support for a proscribed organisation • arranging or assisting with the arrangement of a meeting that supports a proscribed organisation • addressing such a meeting • wearing clothing or displaying articles in public which arouse suspicion of membership or support of a proscribed organisation. The maximum penalty for these offences (except wearing clothing or displaying images) is 10 years’ imprisonment and/or a fine. The Government can also impose financial sanctions on proscribed organisations. 

London: House of Commons Library, 2024. 78p

Edited by Alejandra J Josiowicz, Irasema Coronado 

The Americas are witnessing an era of unprecedented human mobility. With their families or unaccompanied, children are part of this immense movement of people. Children Crossing Borders explores the different meanings of the lives of borderland children in the Americas. It addresses migrant children’s struggle to build a sense of belonging while they confront racism and estrangement on a daily basis.

Unified in their common interest in the well-being of children, the contributors bring an unrivaled breadth of experience and research to offer a transnational, multidimensional, and multilayered look at migrant childhoods in Latin America. Organized around three main themes—educational experiences; literature, art and culture, and media depictions; and the principle of the “best interest of the child”—this work offers both theoretical and practical approaches to the complexity of migrant childhood. The essays discuss family and school lives, children’s experience as wage laborers, and the legislation and policies that affect migrants.

This volume draws much-needed attention to the plight of migrant children and their families, illuminating the human and emotional toll that children experience as they crisscross the Americas. Exploring the connections between education, policy, cultural studies, and anthropology, the essays in this volume navigate a space of transnational children’s rights central to Latin American life in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.

Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 2022. 255p.

By Deborah M. Weissman, Angelina Godoy,  Havan M. Clark

Immigration enforcement has long served as an indicator of the prevailing visceral fears and loathing toward the Other. The foreign is always suspect. Foreigners in great numbers are especially suspicious. These developments are historically tied to the conventions of colonialism, expanded as a function of foreign policy, and to be sure, ideology.' By the mid-2010s, the Global South was characterized as "shithole countries,"  populated by people who were terrorists, rapists, murderers, and corrupt drug dealers. According to former President  Donald J. Trump, immigrants "aren't people. The[y] are animals, further describing them as "bad  thugs and gang members."  These representations have shaped a retributive agenda and have served to create a structure with roots in federal policies and branches in localities throughout the country through which to expel noncitizens. Deportation is a legal concept about which much has been written.' But it is more complicated. For noncitizens, forced expulsion is a lived experience occurring in time and space-an act against the body, mostly black and brown bodies. In this Article, we part ways with the well-established narratives of deportation and the punishment/non-punishment paradigm to conceive of deportation not only as a legal concept, but as a physical act-the final act-that is, the culmination of the immigration enforcement dragnet.  The physical removal of persons from the United States requires a complex system comprised of aviation networks and their various components, airports and airplanes, hangars and flight crews, and an array of physical restraints to intimidate, punish, or subdue deportees.'" We examine this infrastructure to illuminate the circumstances of expulsion and the egregious rights violations often suffered by deportees-violations that are almost always hidden from public view. Part I examines the full dimensions of deportation as a legal concept whereby courts readily admit the harms of expulsion while simultaneously deny its character as a form of punishment." The courts' construction of deportation as a nonpunitive sanction to which a range of constitutional procedural safeguards are not applicable serves to conceal the violence that occurs and distracts from the physical abuse and maltreatment associated with the final act. The legal treatment of deportation elides what, as Jacqueline Rose has written, is conveyed by "the technical term for the returning of migrants to their country of origin [that] is 'refoulement' (to push back or repulse) which also happens to be the French word for the psychoanalytic concept of repression. Part II then describes deportation as an act by which the body is seized and ultimately transported to airports and boarded onto airplanes''-sites previously not considered in the scheme of the immigration removal system's apparatus." It describes the heretofore hidden machinery of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") Air's network of mass deportation and further describes the perils upon removal occasioned by ICE flights.' Part III examines the "legal" trajectories of forced expulsion. It demonstrates how hostility toward immigrants has given rise to an ever-expanding deportation apparatus by which growing numbers of immigrants, including those seeking shelter from persecution, are stripped of legal protections.  It chronicles the subversion of legal processes that result in a heightened risk of wrongful deportation and thus by which immigrants reach the point of the final act of removal." It also illuminates how the ICE Air machinery, which executes deportation orders arising within an unfair system, is complicit in the various legal violations by giving effect to such orders and further curtailing whatever rights remain at the moment of the final act of deportation  Part IV takes up concerns largely unaddressed in legal scholarship: the detailing of human rights abuses on airplanes and airports-sites that function as the terminal instrumentalities of banishment. It describes the physical and psychological abuses that deportees experience during the final act of removal to demonstrate the urgency of immigrant rights advocacy at these sites. It then identifies the violations of international human rights treaties committed by the United States.25 We do so mindful that invoking human rights law in an effort to reframe the discourse occurs at a time when the question of whether these norms have any relevancy in the United States is very much at issue.  The issue of the relevancy of human rights-or lack thereof-is not a new concern, to be sure. As Jack Goldsmith stated over two decades ago, "We can now better understand how and why the United States perpetuates the double standard. The explanation is not subtle. The United States declines to embrace international human rights law because it can."  However, as Part IV argues, immigrants' rights advocates have nonetheless seized on international norms that apply locally and globally to realize an expanded vision of justice when addressing the harms wrought by ICE Air's deportation machinery. The need to call attention to U.S. exceptionalism with regard to human rights requires that scholars and activists seek their implementation as a means to encourage a discourse of hope and an expectation of realization. Stated otherwise, "all theory must end in practice or come to nothing as theory."  Part V examines airports and airplanes as sites of resistance in the context of immigration federalism debates.  We build on the literature that has called attention to the importance of political geography and immigration devolution policies to underscore the importance of new forms of local activism as a means to assert immigrant rights. Even as growing numbers of localities craft policies to protect immigrants, forming a first wave of resistance to federal anti-immigrant policies, a second wave of subnational advocacy is emerging, seeking to contest both the mechanisms by which people are drawn into the system of immigration enforcement and the institutions which detain them. It is in this context that we identify the campaigns to disrupt the aviation deportation machinery, and the importance of focusing on the local as a means to ensure accountability for individuals whose human rights have been violated. Deportation is a term frequently associated with nativist sentiment and revulsion for those who appear foreign, as well as a type of "cleansing" as consequence of aggressive annexation of territory. 4 The efforts to accelerate the removal of noncitizens from the United States has reconfigured the historic narrative about the nation's relationship with immigration and immigrants. Concerns for the humanity of immigrants requires attention to all facets of the injustices of deportation, including the sites of the final act of removal. As we demonstrate, this may be accomplished through a variety of political and legal strategies designed to call attention to the ways that deportation violates the protection of rights that exist at the very local to the very global levels of law. Notwithstanding our descriptions and analyses of innovative and important anti-deportation campaigns to mitigate the deliberate infliction of human suffering on immigrants, we do not suggest that these strategies ensure success. In the face of the deportation dragnet machine and the aviation networks that are hidden from the public, it would be presumptuous to suggest victory. What this Article offers is a way of understanding and modeling new forms of resistance at sites previously overlooked-resistance that must stand in for the protection of rights until the structures of immigration laws and processes can be humanely reset.  

Hofstra Law Review Volume 49 Issue 2 Article 5 12-1-2021, 63 pages

Stephanie Brooks Holliday, Nicholas M. Pace, Nastassia Reed, Rosemary Li

In 2020, California took steps to address intercounty variation and shortcomings in indigent defense resources through the Indigent Defense Grant Program (IDGP), which provided 9.8 million to public defenders’ offices in small to medium-sized counties. An understanding of the implementation and outcomes of the projects initiated by grantees is critical to identifying ways to improve the effectiveness of indigent defense across the state and achieve the goals of the IDGP. Authors detail how grantees used program funds, what the funds enabled offices to accomplish, and statewide lessons learned from this program and make recommendations for similar future grant programs.

Key Findings

• The most common grant-funded hires were attorneys, law clerks or law students, and administrative assistants.

• Offices used funds for case-support services, including expert witnesses, immigration support, and interpreters.

• Grantees reported making progress toward such goals as increasing knowledge and skills of staff, improving attorney and staff workloads, and providing services related to behavioral health and well-being.

• Challenges that grantees experienced included hiring and retention difficulties, delays outside the control of the offices, and data and technology limitations.

• Grantees cited flexibility in using funds as a feature of the grant program that maximized its impact and suggested increasing the minimum funding allocation

Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2024, 73 pages

By American Immigration Council

The collusion between local law enforcement agencies and U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) is well-documented. Local law enforcement agencies like the Ohio State Highway Patrol (OSHP) often work in concert with USBP agents in constructing a dragnet that serves as a force multiplier for USBP to funnel immigrants—most of whom have no criminal history—into deportation proceedings. These enforcement practices often go unchecked despite accounts suggesting a pattern of potentially unconstitutional practices. This unfettered enforcement upends the lives of immigrants who have developed deep ties to the United States and often impacts U.S. citizens and immigrants with lawful status who are part of mixed status families. It also makes Latino residents and people of color who are U.S. citizens or lawful immigrants undue targets of enforcement. Immigrants of color including those of Latin American origin who live, travel, or work in Ohio often bear the brunt of these disproportionate and discriminatory immigration enforcement practices.

Washington, DC: American Immigration Council, 2024. 22p.

By Shreya Bhat and Hui Yin Chuah

Mixed migration from Myanmar to countries in South and Southeast Asia has become a common phenomenon driven by various factors, including violence, insecurity, conflict, deprivation of rights, and economic reasons. This report underscores the integral role of smugglers in facilitating migration from Myanmar to Malaysia and Thailand, influenced by a complex interplay of factors that result in considerable variation in the dynamics of smuggling among different population groups and on different routes. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for developing targeted interventions aimed at addressing the vulnerabilities and challenges faced by refugees and migrants in the region.

Geneva, SWIT: : Mixed Migration Centre. 2024, 17pg

By Inga Thiemann

This research report looks into the conditions attached to visa routes for both the care and agricultural sectors, known as ‘tied’ and short-term visas respectively, and the increased vulnerability to exploitation associated with these visas.

The findings show significant issues of debt and deductions of wages across both sectors and barriers to reporting concerns.

London: Focus on Labour Exploitation. 2024, 68pg

By  Claire Rimmer 

Setting the scene for safe pathways: definitions and data Complementary or safe pathways are a relatively new addition to global refugee protection, and a particularly new phenomenon in Europe. Here, recent years have seen implementation of a growing number of safe pathway programmes, very often small in scale. This has created a complex landscape, involving many different stakeholders working in different ways, and involving different patterns of cooperation between host, destination and first asylum countries. As such, establishing common definitions is challenging, particularly given the necessary flexibility most programmes employ in order to succeed in their specific political and operational contexts. This study nonetheless identifies six types of pathway, showing that all safe pathway programmes include one or a combination of the six. They are as follows: 1) education, 2) labour mobility, 3) extended family members/ family unity, 4) humanitarian pathways and visas, 5) private and/ or community sponsorship, 6) and other, usually non-specific safe stay and entry options. Mapping safe pathways in Europe is further complicated by the limited availability of information on planned and current European programmes, and lack of transparency concerning the extent to which pathways achieve “additionality”, i.e. the extent to which they operate in addition to refugee resettlement and thus contribute to durable solutions for refugees. In some cases, they are rather a substitute for the – usually preferable – resettlement options. 2) European safe pathway programmes: what works? The study identifies a number of approaches and good practices which stakeholders believe have worked well, covering the range of pathways and programmes. It also identifies examples of promising new practices in both newer and more established programmes. The most important examples of what works 

Brussels, Belgium: ECRE  European Council on Refugees and Exiles, 2024. 58pg

By Emily Ryo and Ian Peacock

In the current era of intensified immigration enforcement and heightened risks of deportation even for long-term lawful permanent residents, citizenship has taken on a new meaning and greater importance. There is also growing evidence that citizenship denials in their various forms have become inextricably linked to immigration enforcement. Who is denied citizenship, why, and under what circumstances? This article begins to address these questions by developing a typology of citizen denials and providing an empirical overview of each type of citizenship denial. Taken together, the typology of citizenship denials and the accompanying empirical overview illustrate the close connection between immigration enforcement and citizenship rights in the United States

USC CLASS Research Paper No. CLASS19-31, USC Law Legal Studies Paper No. 19-31, 47 pages

By Emily Ryo and Reed Humphrey

Removal proceedings are high-stakes adversarial proceedings in which immigration judges must decide whether to allow immigrants who allegedly have violated U.S. immigration laws to stay in the United States or to order them deported to their countries of origin. In these proceedings, the government trial attorneys prosecute noncitizens who often lack English fluency, economic resources, and familiarity with our legal system. Yet, most immigrants in removal proceedings do not have legal representation, as removal is considered to be a civil matter and courts have not recognized a right to government­appointed counsel for immigrants facing removal. Advocates, policymakers, and scholars have described this situation as an access-to-justice crisis or a representation crisis for immigrant communities. The prevailing wisdom suggests that the solution to this crisis is more lawyers or more nonlawyer practitioners, such as accredited representatives and legal technicians, who can provide affordable and quality legal services. The focus, therefore, has been on the ubiquity of "legal deserts," commonly defined as areas that are in shortage of lawyers, and on ways to increase the supply of legal service providers in the marketplace.

This Article presents an empirical study of legal representation that unsettles this prevailing wisdom by showing why an adequate supply of legal service providers is a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition to address the representation crisis. Our study uses a new and original dataset that we compiled for the purposes of this study on immigration lawyers and non-detained immigrant respondents in removal proceedings. Our findings suggest that although the focus on the supply­side dimension of the representation crisis is important, it obscures other complex sets of barriers to obtaining legal representation that are distinct from the problem of legal deserts. Specifically, our empirical analyses show that whether a non-detained immigrant respondent obtains legal representation is predicted by where they reside, their primary language, and the size of their conational social networks, controlling for the availability of practicing immigration lawyers in close proximity to their places of residence and other potential confounders. In short, we argue that geography, language, and networks are destiny for immigrant respondents when it comes to obtaining legal representation. Thus, addressing the representation crisis requires looking beyond the problem of legal deserts to attend to a variety of other hurdles to obtaining legal representation that are associated with certain geographical, linguistic, and social isolation in which many immigrants live.

101 North Carolina Law Review 787-840 (2023), 54 pages

By Melanie Gower

People claiming asylum in the UK are not eligible for mainstream welfare benefits and are generally not allowed to work. Instead, asylum seekers who are destitute can apply to UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI, a Home Office directorate) for accommodation or money (or both) while they are waiting for a decision on their asylum claim. This is commonly referred to as ‘asylum support

London: House of Commons Research Library 2024. 29p.