Authors:

Benni Howard

Date Created:

Not specified

Course Title:

Professor:

Not specified

About Paper:

Circuit Court of Appeals This thesis looks at three cases that have appeared in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals between 2017 and 2025. These cases address due process in immigrant removal proceedings through processes including (1) consideration of the cost of bond hearings; (2) right to counsel in reasonable fear hearings, which serve as one of the few arguments against an order of expedited removal; and (3) governmental responsibility to provide adequate notice of removal proceedings. All selected cases highlight the ways in which the Ninth Circuit Court fails to effectively effectively affirm immigrant due process rights through their dockets due to lack precedential value, enforceability of implementation, limited scope, and vulnerability to Supreme Court opinion. These cases complicate the narrative of the Ninth Circuit Court as a progressive beacon of immigrant due process protections. Through a close reading of primary material, including the original language of Hernandez v. Sessions (9th Cir. 2017), Zuniga v Barr (9th Cir. 2019), Singh v Garland (9th Cir. 2024), as well as analysis and synthesis of secondary sources including law journal essays and publications, I demonstrate the political and legal significance of the Ninth Circuit Court's rulings and tell the story of eroding immigrant due process on the West Coast in a time of conflict between higher and lower courts and amidst a culture of anti-immigrant sentiment.

Source:

University of Oregon / 2026

Topics:

No topics listed

Co-authors:

Benni Howard