Monday, December 22, 2008

An Immigration Symposium

The WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY JOURNAL OF LAW & POLICY recently published an immigration symposium that is worth a look.  Here are the contributions:

Legomsky, Stephen H. Introduction. 27 Wash. U. J.L. & Pol'y 1-5 (2008).

Hollifield, James F., Valerie F. Hunt and Daniel J. Tichenor. Immigrants, markets, and rights: the United States as an emerging migration state. 27 Wash. U. J.L. & Pol'y 7-44 (2008).

Chacón, Jennifer M. Citizenship and family: revisiting Dred Scott. 27 Wash. U. J.L. & Pol'y 45-70 (2008).

Family, Jill E. Threats to the future of the immigration class action. 27 Wash. U. J.L. & Pol'y 71-122 (2008).

Lukes, Timothy J. and Minh T. Hoang. Open and notorious: adverse possession and immigration reform. 27 Wash. U. J.L. & Pol'y 123-137 (2008).

Moore, Jennifer. The alchemy of exile: strengthening a culture of human rights in the Burundian refugee camps in Tanzania. 27 Wash. U. J.L. & Pol'y 139-159 (2008).

In addition, a new article by Nancy Morawetz (NYU), who does first rate scholarship, also is worth a look:  Morawetz, Nancy. Rethinking drug inadmissibility. 50 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 163-209 (2008).

KJ

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2008/12/an-immigration.html

| Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef0105368b7df2970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference An Immigration Symposium:

Comments

'Open and notorious: adverse possession and immigration reform' is the one that caught my eye. That is what I want to read: an idea I'd never thought of rather than the same tired arguments; short; unpretentious; not sneering at those with opposing viewpoints.

As for the concept itself, I don't think it's that appealing. Doesn't everybody think when they first hear of adverse possession 'That's stealing!'

Politically, it would be hard to beat back the hot reaction. Since the 'taking' would be by foreign nationals, you'd surely get a lot of Reconquista/America surrenders. Amnesty you can sell as charity by you. This will be portrayed as defiance, even hostility, by 'them' even if its engineered on their behalf by American citizens. Those supporters would be accused of treason, that kind of thing.

Posted by: Jack | Dec 22, 2008 7:04:04 PM

Post a comment