Saturday, August 18, 2018
After U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced the Trump administration’s new “zero-tolerance” policy in April, the U.S. government faced a national outcry. This new policy meant all adults crossing the border illegally would be criminally prosecuted. A consequence of that shift has meant that thousands of immigrant children have been torn apart from their parents.
Since then, and under a judge’s mandate, the federal government has been scrambling to reunify families. In part one of a two-part episode, Latino USA breaks down the aftermath of the family separation crisis and explores what happens to the hundreds of kids who still aren’t reunited with their families because their parents have been deported.
Juan Sanchez first gained national notoriety back in June of 2018 when Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley flew to Texas to try and tour a shelter that he believed was housing children who had been separated from their parents under the Trump administration’s new “zero-tolerance” policy. Senator Merkley was denied access to the shelter and was even questioned by police who were called by the shelter’s staffers.
The shelter —a converted Walmart that did in fact house separated children— became the ire of many American citizens. It was emblematic of a feeling that Americans were being left in the dark and that the U.S. government was not being transparent about how it was treating migrant children.
That converted Walmart was actually run by a non-profit called Southwest Key Programs that also runs 36 other shelters across Texas, Arizona and California. Sanchez, Southwest Key’s CEO, has come under a lot of scrutiny in the following weeks for housing separated children and for “cashing in” on the sheltering of children, as Patty Quinzi, a protestor outside Southwest Key headquarters, stated. Southwest Key has been awarded nearly $1 billion in contracts from the government since 2015 and Sanchez’s compensation was nearly $1.5 million last year. Since the “zero-tolerance” policy was revoked, Southwest Key has also received criticism after reports came out of several cases of sexual misconduct that occurred at Southwest Key shelters over the last two years.
However, Juan Sanchez’s official bio on the Southwest Key website depicts a social justice champion. Sanchez grew up on the border in Brownsville, Texas. He served on the board of the National Council of La Raza, one of the most prominent Latino advocacy organizations. And he has been the recipient of multiple awards for his work with migrant children.
There seem to be two opposing narratives when it comes to Juan Sanchez. So host Maria Hinojosa and producer Antonia Cereijido travel to Austin, Texas, to see which one was the correct one.
The recent wave of international migration has reinforced the growing trend in diversity and need to focus on immigrant children’s well-being. A new OECD report, “The Resilience of Students with an Immigrant Background: Factors that Shape Well-Being,” underlines the significant role education systems, schools and teachers can play in helping immigrant students integrate into their new communities. The report reveals some of the difficulties students with an immigrant background encounter and where they receive the support they need. The report provides an in-depth analysis of the risk and protective factors that can undermine or promote the resilience of immigrant students. It explores the role that education systems, schools and teachers can play in helping these students integrate into their communities, overcome adversity, and build their academic, social, emotional and motivational resilience.
The OECD report focuses not only on students’ academic achievements but also on “their social, emotional and motivational well-being.” In an interview with CMRubinWorld founder C.M. Rubin, report author Francesca Borgonovi, an analyst at the OECD Directorate for Education and Skills, also discusses the important role of an arts and sports education. Borgonovi notes that “providing both arts and sports in schools are critical to support the growing diversity arising from international migration” and that these subjects “can be particularly beneficial for students with learning disabilities and from disadvantaged backgrounds.” Read the Full Article
Immigration Article of the Day: A National Study of Immigration Detention in the United States by EMILY RYO and IAN PEACOCK
Amidst growing reports of abuses and rights violations in immigration detention, the Trump administration has sought to expand the use of immigration detention to facilitate its deportation policy. This study offers the first comprehensive empirical analysis of U.S. immigration detention at the national level. Drawing on administrative records and geocoded data pertaining to all noncitizens who were detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in fiscal year 2015, we examine who the detainees are, where they were held, and what happened to them. The bulk of the detained population consisted of men (79 percent) and individuals from Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras (together, 89 percent). Over 59,000, or about 17 percent, of the detainees were juveniles under the age of eighteen. All states in the United States had one or more facility, with Texas and California having the highest number of facilities and detainees. Detention in privately operated facilities and in remote locations was common. We analyze three key detention outcomes: detention length, inter-facility transfers, and facility-related grievances. The average detention length for adults released in fiscal year 2015 was 38 days, though tens of thousands were detained for many months or years. A majority of these detainees experienced one or more inter-facility transfers, many involving movements across cities, states, and federal judicial circuits. In fiscal year 2015, the Detention Reporting and Information Line received over 48,800 facility-related grievances, a majority of which concerned issues pertaining to access to legal counsel and basic immigration case information. We find that detention outcomes vary significantly across facility operator types (private versus non private) and facility locations (within or outside of major urban areas). Specifically, our multivariate regression analyses show that confinement in privately operated facilities is associated with significantly longer detention and a higher number of grievances. We find a similar pattern of results for confinement in facilities located outside of major urban areas. On the other hand, confinement in privately operated facilities, and confinement in facilities located outside of major urban areas, respectively, are associated with lower risks of inter-facility transfers. These findings provide an important foundation for ongoing public discourse and policy discussions on the expanded use of detention as an immigration enforcement strategy.
Friday, August 17, 2018
Executive Office for Immigration Review Announces Largest Immigration Judge Investiture Since At Least 2010
The Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) today held the investiture of 23 new immigration judges, which increases the total number of immigration judges to 351. Since the end of January 2017, 82 immigration judges have been sworn in, and EOIR anticipates three additional hiring classes this fall that will total at least 75 more immigration judges.
As part of a series of common-sense reforms to the immigration court system, Attorney General Jeff Sessions last year introduced a “streamlined hiring plan” emphasizing clear deadlines for ensuring immigration judge candidates move efficiently through the hiring process. Due to this effort, some of the immigration judges sworn-in on Friday were hired in approximately 266 days, down from an average of 742 days just one year ago.
The investiture was announced by EOIR Director James McHenry, and Principal Deputy Chief Immigration Judge Christopher A. Santoro presided over the investiture during a ceremony held Aug. 10, 2018, at the Department of Justice’s Great Hall in Washington, D.C.
“Hiring more immigration judges and reducing the time it takes to hire a judge are two key elements reducing the pending caseload of immigration court cases,” said Attorney General Jeff Sessions. “EOIR Director James McHenry should be commended for making tremendous progress on both fronts since he became Acting Director in May 2017. Under his leadership, we are making great strides toward having an immigration court system that serves the national interest.”
After a thorough application process, Attorney General Jeff Sessions appointed Stuart D. Alcorn, Robert A. Fellrath, Kathleen French, Daniel B. Gilbert, Lena Golovnin, Cynthia Gordon, Nathan L. Herbert, Howard C. Hom, Natalie B. Huddleston, David C. Koelsch, W. Scott Laragy, Zakia Mahasa, Michael G. McFarland, Patrick M. McKenna, Nancy E. Miller, Angela Munson, Jonathan W. Owens, Kaarina Salovaara, Eric J. Tijerina, Nelson A. Vargas-Padilla, Michael G. Walleisa, George J. Ward Jr., and Jason R. Waterloo to their new positions.
One of the new judges, David C. Koelsch from 2012-15 was a professor and director of the Immigration Law Clinic at the University of Detroit Mercy School of Law. He has been teaching part time at Catholic Columbus School of Law.
Biographical information about each new judge is found in a notice issued by EOIR.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions has intervened in another Board of Immigration Appeals matter (for previous interventions, click here and here) in an attempt to speed up the processing of cases in the immigration courts.
(1) An immigration judge may grant a motion for a continuance of removal proceedings only "for good cause shown." 8 C.F.R. § 1003.29.
(2) The good-cause standard is a substantive requirement that limits the discretion of immigration judges and prohibits them from granting continuances for any reason or no reason at all.
(3) The good-cause standard requires consideration and balancing of multiple relevant factors when a respondent alien requests a continuance to pursue collateral relief from another authority—for example, a visa from the Department of Homeland Security. See Matter of Hashmi, 24 I&N Dec. 785, 790 (BIA 2009).
(4) When a respondent requests a continuance to pursue collateral relief, the immigration judge must consider primarily the likelihood that the collateral relief will be granted and will materially affect the outcome of the removal proceedings.
Jacey Fortin in the New York Times reports on how a tweet led to an avalanche of support for migrant families separated at the border. On the morning of August 6, law professor Beth Wilensky at the University of Michigan tweeted about a family that had been separated by immigration authorities after crossing into the United States. “I came back and checked my Twitter feed and said, ‘Oh my goodness,’” Ms. Wilensky recalled. Her post was blowing up, on its way to getting tens of thousands of retweets.
The tweet said: “My husband travels a lot. Downside: he’s gone a lot. Upside: frequent flier miles. We just used some to fly a 3-yr-old and his dad, who had been separated at the border, from Michigan (where the son had been taken) to their extended family. DM me if you have miles to donate.”
In her responses, Ms. Wilensky included a link to Miles4Migrants, a two-year-old group that uses donated frequent flier miles to transport refugees to new homes or to reunite families divided by conflict. On that Monday alone, Miles4Migrants received pledges of over one million miles. That number has now ballooned to more than 28 million.
Miles4Migrants grew out of a Reddit group dedicated to “credit churning,” a risky practice that involves systematically signing up for credit cards to win bonuses and points to cover airfare and hotel costs, and even to get cash back. It is a time-consuming and “dorky” hobby, said Seth Stanton, a founding member of Miles4Migrants, which coalesced after one member of the Reddit group, Nick Ruiz, shared a story about using his air miles to help reunite a Pakistani family.
Immigration Article of the Day: Representing Immigrants: The Role of Lawyers in Immigration Bond Hearings by Emily Ryo
Representing Immigrants: The Role of Lawyers in Immigration Bond Hearings by Emily Ryo, Law & Society Review
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.
Thursday, August 16, 2018
A recent trip to my local Barnes & Noble with my kids led me to discover Illegal: A Graphic Novel Depicting One Boy's Epic Journey to Europe, by Eoin Colfer (of the Artemis Fowl series) and Andrew Donkin. It tells the story of two brothers' migration story from Africa to Europe, focusing on the dangers and sacrifices of the journey itself.
It's a suspenseful, gripping and emotional read for adults and older children. (Amazon puts the age range at 9-12, but I might suggest that parents assess it for their own kids first.)
Tommy Trenchard, a Capetown-based freelance photographer and journalist, has taken a series of photographs designed to capture the day-to-day life of South Sudanese refugees in Uganda. Check out the BBC's highlights, which include this snapshot of a toy car made from waste plastic.
Marie Claire has published an essay on one teenage girl's experience of being separated from her mother at the border, and subsequently incarcerated with other girls, some as young as two years old.
"I was taken to a huge, huge cage inside a detention center. They had other cages for the boys, men, and women. It was prison. We could see the other cages, but we weren’t allowed to talk to anyone outside our cage. There were more than 100 girls in there, all from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. Most of the girls were between the ages of 6 and 17, but there were a few very young girls too. The little kids would cry, especially when they first arrived. They were saying how much they missed their parents and how much they wanted to go home. The officers wouldn’t really pay much attention to them; they just walked away like nothing happened. The big girls would try to calm them down. We would play with them or tell them to watch the movie playing on the TV."
This piece also provides a counternarrative to the frequently-told story that recent asylum-seekers are people with little to no ties to the United States. The teen telling her story had already lived in the U.S., was attending high school and spoke English before the border apprehension incident that led to her separation from her mother. ("The officer’s Spanish wasn’t very good, so I said, “Why don’t you speak to me in English to make it easier?” He was shocked. The officers had been cracking jokes, fooling around, and I had understood everything. They talked about how stupid we were to cross the border and how dumb we were to think we wouldn’t be deported.)
She told her story to Marie Claire anonymously, and bravely.
The United States currently detains more asylum-seeking families than any nation in the world, and the government is trying to further expand family detention. Sadly, this practice is not new. Since 2001, families have been held in detention as they pursue claims for protection. Until now, little was known about how detention impacts a family’s access to a fair process.
Today, the American Immigration Council released Detaining Families: A Study of Asylum Adjudication in Family Detention, co-authored by Ingrid Eagly, Steven Shafer, and Jana Whalley. Drawing on thousands of government records over a 15-year period, the report highlights the multiple barriers to justice families seeking asylum face while in detention, as well as the important role the courts have played in protecting due process.
Here are some of the findings:
Families have been detained in remote locations, have faced barriers accessing the courts, and—despite valiant pro bono efforts to assist them—have routinely gone to court without legal representation. Detained parents and children rely on volunteers and nonprofit attorneys willing to travel to remote detention centers to provide pro bono representation, which is still insufficient to serve all detained family members. During the period studied, we found:
- Families were detained in remote locations, far away from urban centers and service providers. Almost all hearings in family detention (93 percent) were conducted remotely over video, rather than in a traditional face-to-face courtroom setting.
- Families released from detention were more likely to have legal representation. At the most recent merits hearings for families in our study, 76 percent of family members who had been released from detention were represented by counsel, compared to 53 percent of family members who remained detained.
- Barriers to obtaining lawyers in detention were particularly profound at the initial stage of proceedings, where only 32 percent of detained family members found counsel.
The vast majority of families released from detention showed up for court.
Despite the challenges posed by detention, family members pursued viable claims for protection and showed up for proceedings after release from detention. During the 15 years of our study, we found:
- Family members who were released from detention had high compliance rates: 86 percent of released family members (with completed and pending cases) had attended all of their court hearings that occurred during our study period. This rate was even higher among family members applying for asylum: 96 percent of asylum applicants had attended all their immigration court hearings.
- Family members who were released from detention and obtained counsel had a relatively high rate of success in their completed cases. Half (49 percent) of family members who were released and sought legal relief from removal with the help of an attorney were allowed to stay at the completion of their case. By comparison, only 8 percent of detained family members without representation had the same success in their cases.
- Case outcomes for families varied widely, however, depending on the jurisdiction in which their cases were adjudicated. In addition to the different asylum grant rates of judges in each jurisdiction, we find that disparities in case outcomes reflect broader jurisdictional inequities, such as the availability of local attorneys and the willingness of local prosecutors to grant a case closure based on prosecutorial discretion.
Families have been subjected to overdetention by immigration officials, and the courts have served as an important check and balance in this complex system.
Our study documents the often lengthy and wasteful process associated with detention. Our review of the government’s own data supplies ample evidence that families have been subjected to overdetention by immigration officials. The study further reveals the important role immigration courts can play in protecting due process—yet these checks and balances can vary considerably across different jurisdictions. This variability results in uneven access to justice for asylum-seeking families.
The film "Crazy Rich Asians" is getting tons of popular attention. The plotline summarized on IMDB: This contemporary romantic comedy, based on a global bestseller, follows native New Yorker Rachel Chu to Singapore to meet her boyfriend's family.
Anne Quito on Quartz discusses We Are Like Air, Xyza Cruz Bacani’s exhibition at the Open Source Gallery in Brooklyn. As the article explains,
"The exhibit’s title, “We Are Like Air,” alludes to these invisible, but essential agents—waiters, housekeepers, drivers, fast food agents, street sweepers, security guards—who ensure the smooth operation of our convenient lives without being seen. Their personal stories, like their presence, are engineered to recede, and it takes someone like Bacani to shock us into seeing them with open eyes and hearts. Frame by frame, Bacani explores not just longing or strife but also love, folly, and levity."
Garin Pirnin in Vanity Fair talks with actress Catalina Sandino Moreno who stars in the cable series The Affair, which in its fourth season introduced the fact that character played by Moreno is undocumented. In the second episode of the fourth season, Luisa (played by Oscar nominee Moreno) gets pulled over for a busted taillight while driving her husband Cole’s (Joshua Jackson) Jeep. As Pirnin writes, "Lucky for her, the cop gets called away, and Luisa’s off the hook—for now. You see, she’s an undocumented immigrant from Ecuador—and even though she’s married to Cole, she’s unable to obtain a green card because she came into the country illegally."
Moreno immigrated from Colombia to the United States in 2005. She came to the U.S. after starring in 2004’s Maria Full of Grace as a pregnant drug mule; her performance earned her a best-actress Oscar nomination in 2005.
Wednesday, August 15, 2018
Young women celebrate the Polish-American holiday of Dyngus Day in Buffalo, NY. (Photo: rocketfuel/Flickr)
This Migration Information Source spotlight looks at European immigrants to the United States. After long constituting the bulk of migration to the United States, European immigration has largely declined since 1960. Following the end of communism in the 1990s, European arrivals slightly increased, but the population has more recently begun to shrink again. In 2016, about 4.8 million Europeans lived in the United States, accounting for 11 percent of the roughly 44 million U.S. immigrants—down from 75 percent in 1960.
Top States of Residence for Europeans in the United States, 2012–16
Lorena Jofre, a DACA recipient, walks her daughter to school before driving to work in Miami, Florida, February 2018.
The most up-to-date survey of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) beneficiaries clearly shows that recipients continue to make positive and significant contributions to the economy. DACA recipients are working in better jobs; earning higher wages; starting businesses; increasing their purchasing power; and pursuing educational opportunities. The survey published today by Tom K. Wong, the Center for American Progress, the National Immigration Law Center, and United We Dream is also one of the first studies to show how heavily the uncertainty surrounding DACA is weighing on the minds of DACA recipients, as well as how DACA recipients are showing tremendous resolve amid this uncertainty.
Top-line results from the survey’s findings include:
96 percent of DACA recipients are currently in school or are working.
The average hourly wage of respondents increased by 78 percent since receiving DACA, from $10.32 per hour to $18.42 per hour. Among respondents 25 years and old, wages increased by 97 percent.
89 percent of respondents, and 92 percent of those 25 years and older, are currently employed. After receiving DACA, 54 percent reported moving to a job with better pay; 46 percent moved to a job with better working conditions; 45 percent moved to a job that better fit their education and training; and 45 percent moved to a job that better fit their long-term career goals.
6 percent of respondents, and 8 percent of those 25 years and older, started their own business after receiving DACA, outpacing the general population in terms of business creation.
The purchasing power of DACA recipients continues to increase: 62 percent of respondents reported purchasing their first car, which is important not only in terms of state revenue but also regarding the safety benefits of having more licensed and insured drivers on the roads. Additionally, the survey found that 14 percent of respondents purchased their first home after receiving DACA (20 percent among respondents 25 years and older), which produces broader economic effects, including the creation of jobs and new spending in local economies.
The uncertainty created by the Trump administration’s decision to rescind DACA is taking a toll on the well-being of DACA recipients. Forty-five percent of respondents reported that they think about being detained in an immigration detention facility at least once a day; 55 percent reported that they think about being deported at least once a day; and 64 percent reported that they think about a family member being deported at least once a day. Among parents, 76 percent reported that they think about being separated from their children because of deportation at least once a day, and 74 percent think about not being able to see their children grow up because of deportation at least once a day.
Despite the uncertainty, DACA recipients are civically engaged: Since receiving DACA, 49 percent of respondents reported that they have become more politically active; 52 percent reported that they have become more involved in their communities. After their DACA applications were approved, 64 percent reported no longer afraid being of their immigration status, and 64 percent reported feeling more like they belong in the United States.
“Five years of surveying DACA recipients has provided consistent results showing that DACA has not only improved the lives of the recipients, but it has also positively affected their families, the communities in which they live, and our economy more generally,” said Tom K. Wong, senior fellow for Immigration Policy at the Center for American Progress and associate professor of political science at the University of California, San Diego. “This research, as with previous surveys, continues to show that without DACA, the gains that DACA recipients have made—from employment to earning higher wages and starting their own businesses to pursuing educational opportunities that were previously closed to them—would be impossible. Ending DACA would be cruel and counterproductive and would diminish the gains that DACA recipients have made just as many are beginning to hit their stride in their lives and careers.”
Another new column lays out the uncertainty facing DACA in the courts and what’s at stake if it were to end. If Judge Andrew Hanen, currently hearing a challenge to DACA led by the State of Texas, issues an injunction, and renewals are halted, DACA recipients will begin to lose their protections immediately.
While a substantial number of DACA recipients with expiration dates from March to July have applied for renewal, as of July 31, more than 64,000 DACA recipients with expirations through the rest of the year have yet to submit their renewal applications and are at risk. That number skyrockets in 2019 and 2020. CAP estimates that only 3 percent of Dreamers with DACA expirations in 2019 have submitted renewal applications, leaving an estimated 452,700 at risk. Through July 2020, an additional 156,250 DACA recipients will see their protections disappear.
This means that, putting aside those with pending renewal applications, 1,240 DACA recipients will lose protection every day in 2019, and 732 will lose protection each day through July 2020.
“First and foremost, losing DACA exposes recipients to detention and deportation in an unparalleled era of immigration enforcement,” said Nicole Prchal Svajlenka, senior policy analyst for Immigration Policy at the Center for American Progress. “It would also force hundreds of thousands of Dreamers from the workplace and, on a state-by-state basis, could end their opportunity to apply for drivers’ licenses and limit access to higher education.”
“Trump’s decision to kill DACA last year was wrong. We have always known the immense impact DACA has made in the life of immigrant youth and our communities. As this administration continues to attack us and feed more immigrants to the deportation force, Congress must vote to defund the deportation agencies and pass legislation to protect immigrants in a way that is permanent and clean,” said Sanaa Abrar, advocacy director at United We Dream. “This year’s survey showed that a large number of DACA recipients are civically engaged, and we are certain we’ll see immigrant youth continue to defend their communities because we are determined to #LiveUnafraid.”
“This study shows, yet again, the enormous impact DACA has had not only on the lives of immigrant youth and their families but also in their communities,” said Ignacia Rodriguez Kmec, immigration policy advocate at the National Immigration Law Center and co-author of the column. “Courageous DACA recipients have thus far obtained various legal victories allowing the DACA program to remain. We will continue to fight alongside immigrant youth, including DACA recipients, to ensure they have a secure future in this country, which is their home.”
Click here to read the results and the methodology: “Amid Legal and Political Uncertainty, DACA Remains More Important Than Ever” by Tom K. Wong, Sanaa Abrar, Tom Jawetz, Ignacia Rodriguez Kmec, Patrick O’Shea, Greisa Martinez Rosas, and Philip E. Wolgin.
Inside InSight: From Migrant Farming to Mars
NASA-JPL InSight engineer Marleen Martinez Sundgaard works in a simulated Martian sandbox. She tests science instruments meant for Mars right here on Earth. Growing up in a migrant farming family, Marleen was always dreaming of the stars - now her dream has become a reality.
Landing in November 2018, NASA's InSight will probe beneath the surface of Mars, study the planet's interior and shed light on how rocky planets - inside and outside our solar system - form.
Keep up with InSight here.
Tuesday, August 14, 2018
More than 120 immigration law professors today sent a letter to Attorney General Jeff Sessions claiming that the Trump administration’s use of case quotas as a measure of immigration judges’ performance undermines their independence and threatens due process. Nicole Narea on Law 360 offers details.
Monday, August 13, 2018
TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW seeks to advance its academic programs and robust commitment to scholarly inquiry by recruiting multiple faculty candidates for tenure-track or tenured positions.
Since integrating with Texas A&M five years ago, the law school has sustained a remarkable upward trajectory by dramatically increasing entering class credentials; adding nine new clinics and six global field study destinations; increasing the depth and breadth of our career services, student services, academic support, and admissions functions; and hiring twenty-six new faculty members. To maintain and accelerate that trajectory, the School of Law aims to augment and build distinctive pillars of excellence in a number of fields in the coming years. Beyond nationally prominent programs in Dispute Resolution, Intellectual Property, and Natural Resources Law, relevant areas of emerging strength include Immigration Law, National Security Law, International Law, and Real Property Law. As part of a multi-year appointments strategy, the School of Law aims to enhance its strength in discrete areas within these fields, including online dispute resolution, privacy, cybersecurity, climate change, and refugee/asylum law. Our Faculty Appointments Committee will be especially interested in candidates whose profiles offer synergies with core curricular areas of interest, including administrative law, criminal law, family law, and tort law.
While the School of Law welcomes expressions of interest in any of these areas, it is particularly interested in recruiting visionary leaders and outstanding scholars – of any research methodology – who can help to contribute to creating a new, path-breaking sphere of excellence in Health Law, Regulation, and Policy. In conjunction with Texas A&M University’s efforts to develop cutting-edge programs at the intersection of health care, technology, and business, relevant law school faculty will have the opportunity to engage in interdisciplinary scholarship, teaching, and policy work at the highest level.
Texas A&M University is a tier-one research institution and American Association of Universities member. The second largest university in the United States, Texas A&M is a public land-grant, sea‐grant, and space-grant institution dedicated to global impact through scholarship, teaching, and service. Its 19 colleges and schools collectively rank among the top twenty higher education institutions nationwide in terms of research and development expenditures. Texas A&M’s central campus is located in the city of College Station, though the University has a substantial presence in many other cities throughout the state. The School of Law is located in the heart of downtown Fort Worth, a vibrant and rapidly expanding city with a population of one million people, which is renowned for its arts community and culture. The Fort Worth/Dallas area, with a total population in excess of seven million people and one that ranks it among the most diverse metropolitan areas in the United States, offers a low cost of living, a strong and diverse economy, and access to myriad world-class restaurants, entertainment options, and outdoor activities.
The Texas A&M System is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action/Veterans/Disability Employer committed to diversity. The School of Law welcomes applications from a broad spectrum of qualified individuals who will enhance the rich diversity of its academic community and is committed to providing equal opportunity to all employees, students, applicants for employment or admission, and the public, regardless of race, color, sex, religion, national origin, age, disability, genetic information, veteran status, sexual orientation, or gender identity. Candidates must have a J.D. degree or its equivalent. Preference will be given to those with demonstrated outstanding scholarly achievement and strong classroom teaching skills. Successful candidates will be expected to engage in scholarship, teaching, and service.
Rank as an Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor will be determined based on qualifications and experience.
Applicants may email a résumé and cover letter indicating research and teaching interests to Professor Timothy Mulvaney, Chair of the Faculty Appointments Committee, at email@example.com, or send their materials to Professor Mulvaney at Texas A&M University School of Law, 1515 Commerce Street, Fort Worth, Texas 76102-6509. Alternatively, applicants who are not current employees of Texas A&M may submit their materials at https://tamus.wd1.myworkdayjobs.com/TAMU_External, while applicants who are current employees of Texas A&M may submit their materials at https://jobs.tamu.edu/internal-applicants/.