Article by Joanne Gottesman
This Article explores the conduct-based grounds of inadmissibility and their application to youth seeking admission to the United States. This examination illuminates U.S. immigration law's perceptions of children and their culpability for acts committed in childhood. It also highlights the problematic evidentiary issues associated with conduct-based inadmissibility grounds generally. If a conviction is not required, then what is? What facts are sufficient to meet the requirements of those inadmissibility grounds, and what evidence may be used to prove those facts?
Part II of this Article defines critical concepts related to conduct-based inadmissibility grounds. Part III introduces three conduct-based inadmissibility grounds: the “drug trafficker” ground, the “prostitution” ground, and the “fraud/misrepresentation” ground and provides some background on their origins and legislative history. Part IV considers the problematic application of these grounds to the conduct of youth. Part V focuses on the evidentiary issues raised by conduct-based inadmissibility generally, and as applied to youth in particular. Finally, Part VI reflects on what these inadmissibility grounds suggest about how the culpability of youth is viewed through the lens of the immigration statute and recommends new approaches moving forward.
About the Author
Joanne Gottesman, Clinical Professor of Law at Rutgers Law School. Special thanks to Alexandra Ruane, Catherine (Casey) Schu, and Morgan Walsh for their research assistance and to the administrative staff of the Rutgers Law School Clinical Programs in Camden. Thanks are also due to Rachel Prandini, Professor Randi Mandelbaum, and the clients, attorneys, and staff of the Rutgers--New Jersey Department of Child Protection and Permanency (DCPP) Project whose stories and work inspired this article. Please note that names and other identifying information have been changed to protect client confidentiality.
Citation
98 Tul. L. Rev. 65