The Failure of Immigration Appeals

Hausman, David

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2568960

Cited by 9 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These access-to-counsel issues have drawn a great deal of public attention because legal representation-particularly representation of high quality-is associated with greater engagement with the legal process for noncitizens and higher chances of successfully fighting removal (Eagly & Shafer, 2015;GAO, 2016;Hausman, 2016;Markowitz et al, 2011;Miller et al, 2015a;Ryo, 2016Ryo, , 2018. But largely overlooked in public discourse and scholarly research on access to counsel for immigrants are important questions about whether and to what extent the impact of legal representation might be contingent.…”

Section: Access To Counsel For Noncitizensmentioning

confidence: 99%

Represented but unequal: The contingent effect of legal representation in removal proceedings

Ryo

Peacock

2021

Law Soc Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Substantial research and policymaking have focused on the importance of lawyers in ensuring access to civil justice. But do lawyers matter more in cases decided by certain types of judges than others? Do lawyers matter more in certain political, legal, and organizational contexts than others? We explore these questions by investigating removal proceedings in the United States—a court process in which immigration judges decide whether to admit noncitizens into the United States or deport them. Drawing on over 1.9 million removal proceedings decided between 1998 and 2020, we examine whether the representation effect (the increased probability of a favorable outcome associated with legal representation) depends on judge characteristics and contextual factors. We find that the representation effect is larger among female (than male) judges and among more experienced judges. In addition, the representation effect is larger during Democratic presidential administrations, in immigration courts located in the Ninth Circuit, and in times of increasing caseload. These findings suggest that the representation effect depends on who the judge is and their decisional environment, and that increasing noncitzens' access to counsel—even of high quality—might be insufficient under current circumstances to ensure fair and consistent outcomes in immigration courts.

show abstract

Section: Access To Counsel For Noncitizensmentioning

confidence: 99%

Represented but unequal: The contingent effect of legal representation in removal proceedings

Ryo

Peacock

2021

Law Soc Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…David Hausman, for example, has found stark inconsistencies of outcomes among immigration judges and the failure of the Board of Immigration Appeals (and the federal courts) to correct those individual errors and systemic disparities. 48 Some immigration judges are significantly more generous than others in allowing time for an immigrant to obtain legal counsel, and unrepresented immigrants are less likely both to win before the agency and to ultimately seek further review within the agency or in federal court. Hausman's study reinforces prior empirical work that has richly described these significant disparities in immigration adjudication as the "refugee roulette."…”

Section: Formal Agency Adjudicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Direito administrativo sem tribunais

Walker¹

2021

Rev. Dir. Adm.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Como parte do Simpósio da UCLA Law Review sobre as Salvaguardas da Nossa República Constitucional, este artigo defende que é um erro fixar os tribunais como a salvaguarda central no estado administrativo moderno. Não é pequeno o número de exemplos que prescindem de tribunais no Direito Administrativo. Dito de outra forma, as agências federais regulam-nos em muitas formas significativas, e por vezes assustadoras, que ou escapam inteiramente à revisão judicial ou estão pelo menos substancialmente isoladas de tal revisão. Este artigo analisa o fenômeno. Esboça sete categorias de tais ações das agências, baseando-se em exemplos tanto da Administração Obama como da Administração Trump e destacando algumas das pesquisas relevantes. O artigo conclui com algumas observações relativas às implicações do direito administrativo sem tribunais para a teoria e doutrina do direito administrativo e um apelo a uma maior atenção acadêmica.

show abstract

“…Another salient aspect of immigration courts and judges is that immigration judges generally face extraordinarily high caseloads, with little time and staff support to adjudicate those cases (Marouf : 431‐34). In addition, immigration judges' decisions are subject to relatively limited administrative and judicial review (Hausman ; Marouf ).…”

Section: Background On Immigration Bond Hearingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Representing Immigrants: The Role of Lawyers in Immigration Bond Hearings

Ryo¹

2018

Law Soc Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Do immigration lawyers matter, and if so, how? Drawing on a rich source of audio recording data, this study addresses these questions in the context of U.S. immigration bond hearings—a critical stage in the removal process for noncitizens who have been apprehended by U.S. immigration officials. First, my regression analysis using a matched sample of legally represented and unrepresented detainees shows that represented detainees have significantly higher odds of being granted bond. Second, I explore whether legal representation affects judicial efficiency and find no evidence of such a relationship. Third, I examine procedural and substantive differences between represented and unrepresented hearings. My analysis shows no differences in the judges' procedural behaviors, but significant differences in the detainees' level and type of courtroom advocacy. Represented detainees are more likely to submit documents, to present affirmative arguments for release, and to offer legally relevant arguments. Surprisingly, however, I find no evidence that these activities explain the positive effect of legal representation on hearing outcomes. These findings underscore the need to investigate not only what lawyers do in the courtroom, but also less quantifiable factors such as the quality of their advocacy, the nature of their relationship to other courtroom actors, and the potential signaling function of their presence in the courtroom.

show abstract

The Failure of Immigration Appeals

Cited by 9 publications

References 0 publications

Represented but unequal: The contingent effect of legal representation in removal proceedings

Represented but unequal: The contingent effect of legal representation in removal proceedings

Direito administrativo sem tribunais

Representing Immigrants: The Role of Lawyers in Immigration Bond Hearings

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About