Feminist judgments : immigration law opinions rewritten / edited by Kathleen Kim, Kevin Lapp, Jennifer J. Lee.
2023
Formats
| Format | |
|---|---|
| BibTeX | |
| MARCXML | |
| TextMARC | |
| MARC | |
| DublinCore | |
| EndNote | |
| NLM | |
| RefWorks | |
| RIS |
Items
Details
Title
Feminist judgments : immigration law opinions rewritten / edited by Kathleen Kim, Kevin Lapp, Jennifer J. Lee.
Added Author
Imprint
Cambridge, United Kingdom ; New York, NY : Cambridge University Press, 2023.
Description
1 online resource (xxvi, 350 pages) : digital, PDF file(s).
Series
Feminist judgments series.
Formatted Contents Note
Introduction
Kathleen Kim, Kevin Lapp, and Jennifer J. Lee
Chy Lung v. Freeman, 92 U.S. 275 (1875) / Commentary : Julie Dahlstrom, Judgment : Stewart Chang
Nishimura Ekiu v. United States, 142 U.S. 651 (1892) / Commentary : Eunice C. Lee, Judgment : Stella Burch Elias
United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898) / Commentary : Rachel Rosenbloom, Judgment : Jonathan Weinberg
United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind, 261 U.S. 204 (1923) / Commentary : Jaya Ramji-Nogales, Judgment : Joy Kanwar
Landon v. Plasencia, 459 U.S. 21 (1982) / Commentary : Sabrina Balgamwalla, Judgment : Erin Corcoran
Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S 202 (1982) / Commentary : Michael Olivas, Judgment : Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia
Jean v. Nelson, 472 U.S. 846 (1985) / Commentary : Raymond Audain, Judgment : Patricia Winograd
Reno v. Flores, 507 U.S. 292 (1993) / Commentary : Lindsay Harris, Judgment : Julia Hernández
Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001) / Commentary : Nicole Hallett, Judgment : Stacy Caplow and Maryellen Fullerton
Hoffman Plastic Compounds, Inc. v. NLRB, 535 U.S. 137 (2002) / Commentary : Ruben Garcia, Judgment : Kati Griffith
Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (2010) / Commentary : Jack Chin, Judgment: Marissa Montes
Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012) / Commentary : Kristina Campbell, Judgment : Annie Lai
Jennings v. Rodriguez, 138 S. Ct. 830 (2018) / Commentary : Ahilan Arulanantham, Judgment : Sarah Sherman-Stokes and Sarah Schendel
Dep't of Homeland Sec. v. Regents of the Univ. of Cal., 140 S. Ct. 1891 (2020) / Commentary : Kevin Johnson, Judgment : Jennifer Lee Koh.
Kathleen Kim, Kevin Lapp, and Jennifer J. Lee
Chy Lung v. Freeman, 92 U.S. 275 (1875) / Commentary : Julie Dahlstrom, Judgment : Stewart Chang
Nishimura Ekiu v. United States, 142 U.S. 651 (1892) / Commentary : Eunice C. Lee, Judgment : Stella Burch Elias
United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898) / Commentary : Rachel Rosenbloom, Judgment : Jonathan Weinberg
United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind, 261 U.S. 204 (1923) / Commentary : Jaya Ramji-Nogales, Judgment : Joy Kanwar
Landon v. Plasencia, 459 U.S. 21 (1982) / Commentary : Sabrina Balgamwalla, Judgment : Erin Corcoran
Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S 202 (1982) / Commentary : Michael Olivas, Judgment : Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia
Jean v. Nelson, 472 U.S. 846 (1985) / Commentary : Raymond Audain, Judgment : Patricia Winograd
Reno v. Flores, 507 U.S. 292 (1993) / Commentary : Lindsay Harris, Judgment : Julia Hernández
Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001) / Commentary : Nicole Hallett, Judgment : Stacy Caplow and Maryellen Fullerton
Hoffman Plastic Compounds, Inc. v. NLRB, 535 U.S. 137 (2002) / Commentary : Ruben Garcia, Judgment : Kati Griffith
Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (2010) / Commentary : Jack Chin, Judgment: Marissa Montes
Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012) / Commentary : Kristina Campbell, Judgment : Annie Lai
Jennings v. Rodriguez, 138 S. Ct. 830 (2018) / Commentary : Ahilan Arulanantham, Judgment : Sarah Sherman-Stokes and Sarah Schendel
Dep't of Homeland Sec. v. Regents of the Univ. of Cal., 140 S. Ct. 1891 (2020) / Commentary : Kevin Johnson, Judgment : Jennifer Lee Koh.
Summary
This volume, part of the Feminist Judgment Series, shows how feminist legal theory along with critical race theory and intersectional modes of critique might transform immigration law. Here, a diverse collection of scholars and lawyers bring critical feminist, race, and intersectional insights to Supreme Court opinions. Feminist reasoning values the perspectives of outsiders, exposes the deep-rooted bias in the legal opinions of courts, and illuminates the effects of ostensibly neutral policies that create and maintain oppression and hierarchy. One by one, the chapters reimagine the norms that drive immigration policies and practices. In place of discrimination and subordination, the authors demand welcome and equality. Where current law omits the voice and stories of noncitizens, the authors center their lives and experiences. Collectively, they reveal how a feminist vision of immigration law could center a commitment to equality and justice and foster a country where diverse newcomers readily flourish with dignity.
Note
Title from publisher's bibliographic system (viewed on 23 Oct 2023).
Location
www
Available in Other Form
Print version:
Linked Resources
Alternate Title
Cambridge Books Online.
Language
English
ISBN
9781009198950 (ebook)
9781009198936 (hardback)
9781009198943 (paperback)
9781009198936 (hardback)
9781009198943 (paperback)
Record Appears in