|
Immigrant Rights Clinic
L02.2590/2591
Nancy Morawetz
TBA
Open to 3L and 2L students
Maximum of 16 students |
 |
Year-long course
14 credits*
No prerequisites or co-requisites**
|
| |
|
|
 |
Introduction
The Immigrant Rights Clinic has become a leading institution in both local and national struggles for immigrant rights. Through its individual case docket, the clinic has developed new legal theories and set new legal precedents that have been used by other immigrant rights advocates. The clinic also provides essential support to campaigns undertaken by local immigrant organizations through the representation of individual members of immigrant communities in asserting their rights. In its group representation docket, the clinic has supported legislative, public education, and organizing campaigns, and has assisted a variety of community-based groups in successful campaigns on behalf of immigrants. The clinic has also, on occasion, represented immigrant groups in targeted litigation. In all of its work, the clinic seeks direction from community-based groups about the cases and projects that it should undertake.
The work of the clinic centers on three major areas. First, since the overhaul of the immigration laws in 1996, all noncitizens face a vastly changed system for detention and deportation. For noncitizens who have been accused of crimes, there is a de facto dual system of criminal law in which a misdemeanor conviction can lead to mandatory detention and deportation, even for persons who have been legally present in the United States for most of their lives and who have United States citizen spouses and children. In addition, various provisions of the laws have created hurdles to judicial review of the rights of noncitizens. The clinic has developed theories to protect immigrants from expansive readings of these laws and to protect access to the courts. It has also worked with immigrant community organizations on a variety of strategies to revise these laws and change the way that they are enforced in practice.
Second, in recent years the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has greatly increased arrests, detention and removal under existing law. Under a blueprint to “remove all removable aliens,” DHS has initiated a wide array of “enforcement” programs. After the attacks of September 11, 2001, these enforcement efforts placed particular pressure on Arab, Muslim and South Asian communities, through specific programs for registration, arrest and detention. The clinic worked with groups challenging these programs, to document abuses, to counsel immigrants, to represent individuals who face deportation as a result of these initiatives, and to develop theories to combat discriminatory programs. More recently, enforcement has spread fear in immigrant workplaces where the very immigrants who are the subject of bi-partisan efforts to create a new “path to citizenship” are at risk of arbitrary detention and deportation. DHS engages in home and worksite raids in which persons are arrested whether or not they were the targets of the raid. In addition, DHS has an increased presence throughout the criminal justice system and uses that system to target people for deportation regardless of their immigration status or whether they are in fact convicted of a crime. The clinic represents persons identified through these raids, and works with community groups to combat the increased melding of immigration and criminal enforcement.
Third, in recent years, New York has been a center for low-wage immigrant organizing. The clinic provides non-litigation support to these groups' various campaigns to secure rights and achieve dignity and respect in the workplace. The clinic also works with grassroots immigrant organizations on a variety of other issues around which they are organizing.
Course Description
Fieldwork
In the fieldwork component of the Immigrant Rights Clinic, students provide direct legal representation to immigrants and immigrant organizations. In litigation matters, students enrolled in the clinic handle cases at all stages of legal proceedings, from initial client interviews through fact development, interviewing witnesses, drafting pleadings, counseling, negotiation, discovery, motion practice, trial, appellate brief writing and argument. In the past, the clinic has divided its individual docket between immigrant labor cases and deportation and detention cases. Beginning this year, the individual docket will no longer include traditional wage and hour litigation. The litigation docket will continue, however, to include both defensive cases and affirmative litigation on behalf of immigrants and the clinic will appear in both immigration courts and federal district and appellate courts.
The clinic's non-litigation work arises out of the campaigns of community-based immigrant organizations. These campaigns may involve legislative drafting, development of media strategies, planning for meetings with legislative or administrative officials, public education or documentation. Through the clinic's work with organizations, students explore a range of ways of being a social justice lawyer. The students act as the lawyers for groups in these various advocacy efforts. The non-litigation docket will reflect a range of issues around which there is local activism and there are groups whose work we can support.
Each student in the clinic will handle at least one individual and at least one group matter. The individual cases all involve litigation. The group cases will typically involve non-litigation advocacy. Cases and projects are distributed to the extent possible, according to student preference, within the basic parameter that every student will work on an individual and a group matter. The following examples of fieldwork from the Immigrant Rights Clinic docket from the past several years are illustrative of the individual case work that we
do:
| • |
Representing an immigrant arrested in a home raid in which DHS agents violated a host of agency regulations. Our client was asleep in his bed when DHS agents came his home and obtained entry through deceptive tactics. Students in the 2007-2008 clinic have filed a motion to suppress the government’s evidence and to terminate proceedings. This case was referred by Catholic Charities of New Jersey. |
| |
|
| • |
Representing
two immigrants who have been cut off illegally from Temporary Protected Status on the basis of non-criminal violations and traffic infractions. These immigrants have been left in limbo and are vulnerable to arrest and detention due to their lack of documentation. In 2007-2008, the clinic will file a federal lawsuit to require continued provision of documentation of TPS status. This case was referred by Central American Legal Assistance. |
| |
|
| • |
Representing
a lawful permanent resident mother of five who faces deportation because of a single conviction from 1987. Our client is a survivor of domestic violence who was placed in removal proceedings after returning from abroad after she had fled to escape her abuser. Students in 2007-2008 have handled several appearances in Immigration Court and will conduct a hearing for our client this Spring. This case was referred by Bronx Defenders. |
| |
|
| • |
Representing
a long time lawful permanent resident who was ordered deported for a single mail fraud conviction. Our client immigrated from Hong Kong as a child, long believed that he was a US citizen and was found to be a national in a district court case that has since been reversed. In 2007-2008, students prepared a brief to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and successfully negotiated a remand. They will appear on our client’s behalf during proceedings before Immigration Court. This case was referred by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. |
| |
|
| • |
Representingan immigrant who faces prolonged detention while seeking to obtain a judicial ruling on whether he is even deportable. In 2007-2008, the clinic has prepared a habeas petition to be filed in district court to protest detention of our client. This case was referred by Families for Freedom. |
| |
|
| • |
Representing
a lawful permanent resident who immigrated at the age of seven in a case challenging his illegal deportation. After several years of litigation, including a habeas action in district court and a successful defense of the district court’s judgment in the court of appeals, the courts ordered the government to provide our client with a hearing on whether deportation was justified in this case. In 2006-2007, clinic students conducted the hearing in immigration court and obtained a ruling allowing our client to return to the United States. This case was referred many years ago by Citizens and Immigrants for Equal Justice. |
| |
|
| • |
Representing
a transgender immigrant facing deportation to Ecuador. In 2006-2007, clinic students conducted research and fact investigation to develop this client’s application for relief from removal. After a full hearing in Immigration Court, our client was awarded Withholding of Removal. This case was referred by Immigration Equality. |
| |
|
| • |
Representinga young man who faces deportation and has a meritorious claim that he is a citizen. In 2006-2007, students developed proof of our client’s citizenship and developed a novel theory for challenging detention during the pendency of removal proceedings. After securing our client’s release and the lifting of the detainer in our client’s case, the clinic has shared its model papers with others, leading to similar actions on behalf of citizens in New York and around the country. This case was referred by Bronx Defenders. |
| |
|
| • |
Representinga lawful permanent resident who was placed in removal proceedings as a result of the Absconder Initiative, a program that targeted immigrants from selected countries, all of which were majority Muslim countries. This case was referred by the Coney Island Avenue Project. In 2005-2006, students represented our client in an evidentiary hearing before the immigration court and prevailed in preventing an order that would have separated our client from his wife and two young children. |
| |
|
| • |
Representing
a lawful permanent resident from Cambodia who was denied citizenship due to the agency’s refusal to credit her doctor’s statements about post-traumatic stress disorder. In 2001-2002, students filed a district court action to obtain citizenship, leading to our client being sworn in as a citizen by the end of the year. |
The following examples of fieldwork from the current Immigrant Rights Clinic docket are illustrative of the group case work that we do:
| • |
Representing
Families for Freedom (FFF), a multi-ethnic organization of families fighting detention and deportation policies. In 2007-2008, students have worked with the FFF’s International Deportee Justice Committee to urge consulates to better protect the rights of their nationals. Students are also working with FFF to develop a handbook to assist families who face deportation in preparing for the financial havoc caused by deportation. The 2006-007 students drafted an amicus brief to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights on how the mandatory deportation of parents fails to provide protection to American children and provided support to FFF’s campaign with consulates of countries with significant New York immigrant communities to reduce deportation of members of those communities. |
| |
|
| • |
Representing
the Immigrant Defense Project of the New York State Defenders’ Association (IDP) in a litigation campaign to limit overly broad application of mandatory deportation rules in cases involving misdemeanor drug convictions. In 2007-2008, student drafted an amicus brief to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to limit application of the mandatory deportation rules to low level marijuana offenses. In 2006-07, students drafted amicus briefs to both federal courts and the Board of Immigration Appeals advocating that multiple state misdemeanor possession convictions do not constitute a “drug trafficking” aggravated felony. The Board of Immigration Appeals ruled en banc in our favor. |
| |
|
| • |
Representing
Domestic Workers United in legislative advocacy before the New York State legislature to improve conditions for the largely immigrant domestic work force. This advocacy that follows on the clinic’s past assistance to DWU in its successful campaign before the New York City Council for a law requiring businesses that refer workers to jobs to take measures to ensure compliance with established labor standards. |
| |
|
| • |
Representing
Wind of the Spirit (WOS), a grassroots group in New Jersey in its campaign to stop Morristown from entering into a “287(g)” agreement that would allow local police to act as immigration officers. In 2007-2008, students prepared advocacy materials and met with local officials in support of WOS’s ongoing campaign. |
| |
|
| • |
Representing
Immigration Equality in a campaign to limit the expansion of HIV bars to legal immigration status and to roll back antiquated restrictions on the immigration of persons who are HIV +. In 2006-07, students drafted proposed legislative language, prepared background materials, and participated in legislative visits. |
| |
|
| • |
Representing
the New Sanctuary Coalition, a coalition of churches and faith groups, in its campaign to raise awareness of local government complicity with an inhumane system for detention and deportation. In 2007-2008, students worked with the coalition to educate members, provide public education materials and launch this campaign. |
| |
|
| • |
Representing
the New York Civic Participation Project (NYCPP) in its campaign to obtain recognition of major Muslim holidays in the New York City public schools. In 2007-2008, students worked with NYCPP in framing its campaign and negotiating the legal issues surrounding changing school holidays. |
| |
|
| • |
Representing
national immigrant advocacy groups in amicus filings before the circuit courts and the Supreme Court on issues related to the standards for detention and deportation. In 2007-2008, the clinic submitted a brief on the consequences of prolonged detention to the Ninth Circuit. In previous years, we have submitted briefs to the Supreme Court mandatory detention, prolonged post-removal detention, and standards for determining whether deportation is mandatory. |
| |
|
| • |
Representing
Make the Road New York (MRNY), a grassroots organization with a strong involvement in immigrant communities, in a campaign to protect immigrant New Yorkers from illegal inquiries into their immigration status. In 2007-2008, students worked with MRNY to develop practical strategies for immigrant New Yorkers who face improper police questioning. |
| |
|
| • |
Representing
with PROBAR, a nonprofit group providing legal services to detainees in Texas, to provide support for New Yorkers who are detained in Texas facilities following their arrest in New York. In 2007-2008, students conducted a bond hearing, prepared briefs on complex legal issues and will conduct a full hearing on behalf of a New Yorker arrested in a raid on Long Island. |
| |
|
| • |
Representing
the Council of People’s Organizations in a campaign to assist Muslim community members whose citizenship applications have been delayed, and to raise public awareness of the discriminatory treatment of applicants from Muslim communities. In 2006-07, students interviewed community members, researched litigation options, and drafted materials for media coverage. |
The Seminar
The seminar component of the Immigrant Rights Clinic is a practice-oriented examination of advocacy on behalf of non-citizens and the different roles that can be played by a social justice lawyer. The seminar focuses on issues that arise in our fieldwork and builds classes around the clinic's case work. The seminar allows students an opportunity to analyze the legal, social, political, and other obstacles to achievement of their clients' goals, as well as a chance to reflect on the strategic choices they face. The problems of non-citizens frequently arise at the intersection of multiple and conflicting legal regimes, including immigration, criminal, labor, employment, and civil rights laws. Students grapple with the dramatic changes effected by the recent legislative changes, developing case law, and subsequent legislative and administrative developments at the federal and state level. The seminar will also consider the impact of those changes on individuals, families, and communities, and the role of race, class, and other factors in shaping national and local policy toward non-citizens.
Faculty
The clinic will be taught by Professor Nancy Morawetz and a new Immigrant Defense Fellow. The Immigrant Defense Fellow will be selected this Spring and will be an experienced attorney.
Application Procedure
Students who are interested in applying to the Immigrant Rights Clinic should submit the standard application, résumé and transcript online via CAMS. Applicants should submit a one-two page response to Question 4 of the standard application and should ignore the indicated 300 word limit. All 3L applicants will be interviewed. 2L applicants will be contacted by e-mail if they are invited to be interviewed. If you have any questions regarding the application process, please contact Sallie Kim at 212-998-6459 or sallie.kim@nyu.edu.
There is no formal application process for the Advanced Immigrant Rights Clinic, which is limited to students who enrolled in the Immigrant Rights Clinic in the previous year.
Student Contacts
We recommend that students interested in the clinic speak to members of the 2007-2008 Immigrant Rights Clinic and the Advanced Immigrant Rights Clinic.
2007-2008
Immigrant Rights Clinic
Leila Azari
Chirag Gopal Badlani
Anjali Bhargava
Jessica Braverman
Sambo Dul
Katherine Evans
Sarah Fick
Thomas Fritzsche
Sarah Guggenheim-Deri
Adrienne Hernandez
Carrie Johnson
Amanda Marie Klasing
Kimberly Nortman
Alexa Silver
Tim Warden-Hertz
Angela Yen
|
|
2007-2008
Advanced Immigrant Rights Clinic
Heidi Altman
Mandy Hu
Sonia Lin
|
* 14 credits includes 3 clinical credits and 4 academic seminar credits per semester.
** Courses in immigration
law, administrative law, federal courts, public benefits
law, evidence, and civil litigation
may be helpful.
|
