46622 research outputs found
Sort by
Immigration Detention Abolition and the Violence of Digital Cages
Full text linkThe United States has a long history of pernicious immigration enforcement and surveillance. Today, in addition to more than 34,000 people held in immigration detention, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) shackles and surveils an astounding 376,000 people under its “Alternatives to Detention” (“ATD”) program. The number of people subjected to this surveillance has grown dramatically in the last two decades, from just about 1,700 in 2005. ICE’s rapidly expanding Alternatives to Detention program is a “digital cage,” consisting of GPS-outfitted ankle shackles and invasive phone and location tracking. Government officials and some immigrant advocates have characterized these digital cages as a humane “reform,” ostensibly an effort to decrease the number of people behind bars. This Article challenges that framework, illuminating how, instead of moving us closer to justice and liberation—and toward abolition—digital cages disperse the violence of immigration enforcement and surveillance more broadly, and more insidiously, ensnaring hundreds of thousands more immigrants, families, and communities. The increasing digitization of immigration enforcement and surveillance is part of a growing, and expansive, geography of violence. This Article argues that if we want to take deportation abolition seriously—that is, an end to immigrant detention, enforcement, and deportation—we must consider the impact of this growing surveillance. Building upondeportation abolition literature situating immigration detention as a form of violence, this Article posits that rather than mitigate violence, digital cages create a “violence of invisibility” that is equally, if not more, dangerous. Digital cages, masquerading as a more palatable version of enforcement and surveillance, create devastating harms that are hidden in plain sight, while duping us into thinking of these measures as more humane. This Article concludes by arguing that digital cages are a “reformist reform” that merely make more efficient the kind of oppressive and racialized violence that has long informed the United States’ immigration enforcement regime. If we truly seek an end to this violence, this Article argues for abolition—not just of detention, but of digital cages as well
Dissenting Opinion?
Full text linkJohnson v. M\u27Intosh is important for its extensive description of the racist Doctrine of Discovery. But its holding had no bearing on legal rights of American Indian nations. The opinion\u27s articulation of tribal rights to land ownership and retained sovereignty were correctly stated
The Cycle of Delegitimization: Lessons From Dred Scott on the Relationship Between the Supreme Court and the Nation
Full text linkThis Article examines how Chief Justice Taney’s opinion in Dred Scott v. Sandford sparked a cycle of delegitimization that parallels contemporary debates about the Supreme Court’s legitimacy crisis. Part I explicates how one family’s fight for freedom in Missouri reached the Supreme Court, the resulting radical decision, and the nation’s reaction to show the initial stages of this cycle.
Part II examines the impact of Dred Scott on politics and law during the James Buchanan administration (1857–1861). During this period, the federal government, Southern states, and some Western territories swiftly implemented the decision, for example by expelling free Black residents. The opinion and its implementation horrified Northerners and inspired their efforts to resist Dred Scott, including by passing legislation to expand Black rights and repudiating Dred Scott in judicial opinions such as Lemmon v. People of New York. The widespread Northern belief that Dred Scott was illegitimate propelled Republicans, who promised to defy its holdings, into national power.
Part III explores how Republicans during the Lincoln and Andrew Johnson administrations (1861–1868) flouted and systematically dismantled Dred Scott by passing laws and implementing executive policies to contradict its holdings. These efforts culminated in the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, superseding Dred Scott and completing the cycle of delegitimization.
Finally, Part IV uses the lessons of this nineteenth century cycle of delegitimization to scrutinize the Supreme Court’s current legitimacy crisis. It argues that recent decisions including Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization could inspire a similar cycle of delegitimization
How to Search The Colorado House and Senate Journals Collection In Colorado Law’s Scholarly Commons
Full text linkDirections for how to search the Colorado House and Senate Journals digital collection.https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/colorado-house-and-senate-journals/1580/thumbnail.jp