SEEKING REVIEW: Immigration Law and Federal Court
Immigrants at the Intersection of Congressional, Administrative, and Judicial Power
For more than ten years, Congress has been amending the Immigration and Nationality Act in its efforts to reduce the amount and quality of federal court review of immigration law. Despite these legislative changes, administrative streamlining and increased deportation enforcement has led to an exponential increase in the immigration law caseload. One study reports a 970% increase in the immigration related caseload during this past decade. Most recently, Congress adopted the Real I.D. Act as part of an omnibus appropriation bill. This legislation purports to eliminate federal habeas corpus review in all immigration cases and transfers pending habeas petitions to the Courts of Appeals. Despite this new legislation and the past restrictions on immigration jurisdiction, litigation continues over the forum and content of judicial review.
On September 26, 2005, the Justice Action Center at New York Law School
invited litigators, judicial administrators, and academics to discuss the
contours of federal court jurisdiction. The program included experienced
litigators reflecting on the battles over jurisdiction during the past
decade or more. Speakers included members of the judiciary and Congress,
and academics addressed such issues as the remaining content of
habeas review, standards of review, the potential for judicial
review of discretionary decisions, other court stripping provisions in the
Real I.D. Act, and the perverse consequences of Congressional limits on
The New York Law School Law Review’s symposium issue “Seeking Review: Immigration Law and Federal Court Jurisdiction” collected the scholarly contributions that emerged from the September 26, 2005 live event. Click here to view the articles.