Open Access Publisher and Free Library
11-human rights.jpg

HUMAN RIGHTS

HUMAN RIGHTS-MIGRATION-TRAFFICKING-SLAVERY-CIVIL RIGHTS

Posts tagged immigration system
Witness to Forced Migration: The Paradox of Resilience

By Mark Lusk

Hope Border Institute is proud to present “Witness to Forced Migration: The Paradox of Resilience,” a new report by Dr. Mark Lusk, professor emeritus of social work at the University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP), and Georgina Sanchez Garcia, psychologist and Ph.D. candidate at UTEP.

Based on years of research into the lived experiences of migrants and refugees, the piece highlights the ways that people dealing with trauma and a broken immigration system build resilience and strength and find meaning in the midst of suffering. It also underscores the structural causes behind forced migration, including poverty and state failure to shield people from violence.

El Paso: Hope Border Institute, 2021. 36p.

Legal Limbo as Subordination: Immigrants, Caste, and the Precarity of Liminal Status in the Trump Era

By Nina Rabin

This Article describes the ways in which prolonged states of legal limbo have grown more precarious, and thereby subordinating, under the Trump administration. Liminal forms of status have long been a feature of U.S. immigration law. But under the Trump administration, legal limbo grew both in prevalence and precarity. Due to Trump’s pursuit of an aggressive enforcement agenda, the legal system has become so overwhelmed that non-detained immigrants find themselves in protracted removal proceedings that routinely last for years. During this time, immigrants are consigned to a marginalized existence that harms their long-term ability to achieve social and economic mobility and integration. In this way, legal limbo has become increasingly tied to the creation and maintenance of a caste system in U.S. society. This Article offers a new conceptual framework, the “spectrum of precarity,” to analyze how and to what extent various types of liminal legal status in immigration law marginalize immigrants. Application of this spectrum to the states of limbo experienced by immigrants under the Obama and Trump administrations reveals very different approaches and outcomes. President Obama created liminal forms of legal status through specific policies and programs: administrative closure and the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program (DACA). These efforts were explicitly designed to provide immigrants with a measure of social integration, along with protection from deportation. In contrast, immigrants in the Trump Era found themselves in limbo due to ballooning backlogs in the over-burdened legal immigration system. As a result, at the close of the Trump administration, immigrants with pending visas and asylum-seekers live in a state of prolonged uncertainty and fear that forces them into a marginalized existence in the shadows. This state of affairs poses a challenge for removal defense attorneys of non-detained immigrants, and calls into question the due process framework that often serves as a guiding structure for advocates in the immigration system. Due process, with its focus on discrete legal events and its failure to pay sufficient attention to the passage of time, risks causing attorneys to become accomplices in the creation of caste. Instead, in the current dysfunctional and disempowering legal immigration system, removal defense attorneys must seek to counterbalance the marginalizing effects of legal limbo on their clients’ daily lives and future trajectories through multi-faceted, interdisciplinary, and community-based models of lawyering.

35 Geo. Immigr. L.J. 567,569. 2021.