•  
  •  
 

Abstract

The Immigration & Nationality Act (INA) governs U.S. immigration law and was enacted to assist and protect international refugees from persecution and threats to life or freedom. The primary legislative purpose of the INA was to conform U.S. asylum law to international standards established in the 1967 Refugee Protocol. This Comment will critically examine the former Biden Administration’s June 2024 Proclamation on Securing the Border, illustrating how the Proclamation’s deterrence-based policies failed to meet the United States’ protective obligations under both international and federal law standards and underscored the inherent flaws of the Executive Branch’s enforcement of U.S. asylum law, particularly in the context of gender-based violence claims. Specifically, the Proclamation is a continuation of the Executive Branch’s misinterpretation of the INA, a trend that is increasing in the current Trump Administration and leading to the impermissible denial of access to fundamental procedural and substantive rights for non-citizens seeking asylum, especially women and girls fleeing gender-based violence, who are already at heightened risk of discrimination and exclusion within the asylum-seeking process.

This Comment argues that the recent overturning of Chevron opens the door for creative litigants to leverage judicial oversight and review to hold the Executive Branch accountable for following the statutory directives of the INA in immigration enforcement. In order to preserve foundational separation of powers principles and uphold U.S. international treaty obligations, this Comment asserts that judicial intervention is a necessary step to shift the focus of immigration reform back towards legislative solutions that better respond to modern conditions and provide gender-based violence victims access to their legally-entitled rights.

Download

Share

COinS