New SSRN Immigration Articles

Here are some recent immigrtaion articles from teh Social Science Research Network (www.ssrn.com):

“Beyond Decisional Independence: Uncovering Contributors to the Immigration Adjudication Crisis” Widener Law School Legal Studies Research Paper No. 10-24 JILL E. FAMILY, Widener University – School of Law.  ABSTRACT:   This article reveals the complicated dynamics of the immigration adjudication crisis. The lesson discovered is that it is important to look beyond any one contributor to the crisis when searching for solutions. Recent proposals for immigration adjudication reform acknowledge that fixing the system requires a multi-faceted approach. This article confirms the need for such an approach by showing how one popular cause of the crisis, a lack of decisional independence, only scratches the surface of what ails the immigration adjudication system. While decisional independence is crucial, it is vital to understand and to emphasize that achieving decisional independence will not fix all of what ails immigration adjudication. Focusing attention away from this one factor reveals five other substantial contributors to the shortcomings of immigration adjudication: substantive immigration law; the conflicting signals of immigration adjudication; the lack of de facto adjudicator independence; the use of diversions from the system; and weakened judicial review. These other contributors are causes of some of the system’s deepest troubles. If these other contributors are not addressed, any reform likely will produce disappointing results.

 “Post-Racial Proxies: Anti-‘Alien’ State and Local Laws and Interest-Convergence Principles” Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 32, 2010 MARY D. FAN, University of Washington – School of Law.  ABSTRACT: Though unauthorized migration into the United States has diminished substantially since 2007, anti-“illegal alien” state and local laws and furor are flaring again. While the biggest worry regarding such “anti-illegal” or “anti-alien” laws is the risk of racialized harm, courts invalidating overreaching statutes are relying on structural doctrines such as preemption, federalism and Supremacy rather than addressing equal protection and antidiscrimination arguments. This article examines how these paradoxes point to how proxies are used in a post-racial era to dance around race, in both destructive and potentially constructive ways. Anti-alien legislation is a proxy way to vent resurgent racialized anxieties and engage in friend-enemy politics founded on conflict with the “Other,” the foreign enemy within, in a time of economic and political turmoil. The approach of cutting back overreaching statutes using structural rather than antidiscrimination doctrines is a constructive use of a post-racial proxy because the approach makes interest convergence rather than racial differentiation and divergence of interests salient. Legislation is invalidated not to “accommodate” the minorities against the majority will, but to preserve the federal balance. The approach is also a technique of bridge-building across worldviews to appeal to hierarchs, who tend to be conservative supporters of tough legislation, as well as egalitarians, who value equality more highly. Moreover equality values need not be lost. They can be enfolded into the analysis, in less polarizing, more widely palatable form.

“Paths to Citizenship: A Comparative Study of Japan, Germany and Sweden” APSA 2010 Annual Meeting Paper MARISHA LECEA, affiliation not provided to SSRN.  ABSTRACT:  This paper examines citizenship policy in Japan, Germany and Sweden in an attempt to explain why some rich, democratic nations have high rates of naturalization and non-restrictive paths to citizenship, while others have negligible rates of naturalization and very restrictive policies. Japan has a very restrictive policy while Sweden has a very open policy. Germany is a mid-level case that has moved from more restrictive to less restrictive over the last several years. In this paper I look at the explanatory potential of internal, institutional, and external variables. I use data from the World Values Survey to compare domestic attitudes. I look at constitutional provisions and the structure of judicial systems to compare institutional factors. I then compare regional integration and security concerns as external pressures. I conclude that cultural attitudes seem to follow, rather than precipitate, policy change, while the institutional and external factors are more promising as explanatory factors for variance in citizenship regimes.

KJ