41 Pages Posted: 21 Oct 2010
Date Written: Winter 2009
Part I of this Article provides an overview of the various administrative and adjudicative entities involved in determining asylum claims to explain the resulting procedural disaster that occurred in the Alvarado case. Part II discusses the reasons why the Proposed Rule stalled within the context of the additional administrative complications resulting from post-September 11 regulations, which adversely impacted domestic violence asylum seekers. Part III discusses the impact of the Proposed Rule on these types of cases over the past ten years and the resulting disparate outcomes. Part IV discusses of the leading, large-scale reform proposals tackling the administrative woes of immigration adjudication and offers alternate, incremental, and therefore more politically viable solutions: finalizing regulations regarding gender-based asylum claims and removing the power to influence immigration policy and procedural from the attorney general's office. These incremental solutions draw on administrative law solutions to repair the immigration system for domestic violence asylum seekers.
Keywords: gender-based violence, administrative law, asylum cases, Alvarado, Administrative Procedures Act, litigation strategy, domestic violence, asylum claims, immigration law,
JEL Classification: K19, K39, K49, J12, I31
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Rogerson, Sarah Hill, Waiting for Alvarado: How Administrative Delay Results in Disparate Outcomes for Immigrant Victims of Gender-Based Violence (Winter 2009). Wayne Law Review, Vol. 55, No. 4, pp. 1811-1850, Winter 2009. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1695104 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1695104