Rights Of Aliens Research Articles

Modularity in technology and organization

This paper is an attempt to raid both the literature on modular design and the literature on property rights to create the outlines of a modularity theory of the firm. Such a theory will look at firms, and other organizations, in terms of the partitioning of rights—understood as protected spheres of authority—among cooperating parties. And it will assert that organizations reflect nonmodular structures, that is, structures in which decision rights, rights of alienation, and residual claims to income do not all reside in the same hands.

Law, Terrorism, and the Plenary Power Doctrine: Limiting Alien Rights

Law, Terrorism, and the Plenary Power Doctrine: Limiting Alien Rights

The Legal-domestic Sources of Immigrant Rights

This article traces the evolution of two types of immigrant rights—alien rights and the right to citizenship—across three polities (the United States, Germany, and the European Union). It argues that the sources of rights expansion are mostly legal and domestic: Rights expansion originates in independent and activist courts, which mobilize domestic law (especially constitutional law) and domestic legitimatory discourses, often against restriction-minded, democratically accountable governments. The legal-domestic hypothesis is qualified and differentiated according to polity, migrant group, and type of immigrant right.

(In)alienable Rights: Property, Feminism, and the Female Body from Ann Radcliffe to the Alien Films

(In)alienable Rights: Property, Feminism, and the Female Body from Ann Radcliffe to the Alien Films. Un article de la revue Romanticism on the Net (Romanticism and Science Fictions) diffusée par la plateforme Érudit.

Analysis of Alternative Standing Doctrines

The right to bring an action in court is an important right which many argue should be granted liberally. The United States Supreme Court, for example, has held that under certain situations access to court is a citizen's fundamental right. This paper discusses one facet of access to the courts, namely, standing to sue: the legal doctrine shaped by both courts and legislatures which determines who can bring a particular lawsuit.Discussions of standing have tended to focus on normative arguments about what standing should be while often neglecting positive implications of alternative standing doctrines. Standing doctrines that either increase or decrease access to court have predictable consequences relevant to the Supreme Court's admonition that standing decisions should be predicated not only upon constitutional considerations but also on practicalities and prudential consequences. Our analysis shows that many liberalizations of standing block the transfer of resources from less valuable to more valuable uses. In that regard they are, to use the Supreme Court's language, impractical and imprudent. In economic terms, standing that is too liberal generates inefficiencies.Section I explores the different consequences of polar standing rules: A rule that allows only one person standing in a particular suit is contrasted with a rule that allows everyone standing. Here, as in most of the paper, the analysis focuses on private lawsuits and ignores lawsuits brought against public officials. Section II summarizes the relevant literature and reviews the liberalizations of standing over the past twenty years. Section III discusses the largely unrecognized relationship between restrictive standing, alienable rights, and efficiency; also reviewed here are class action lawsuits and standing to sue public officials. Section IV contains the conclusions.

Protecting the World's Exiles: The Human Rights of Non-Citizens

Fifty years after the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, attention to and scrutiny of human rights abuses plays an integral role in shaping governments' foreign policy, as well as the missions of many of the world's leading nongovernmental organizations. In spite of this scrutiny, however, more than 100 million people the world over-people whom this Declaration was intended to protect-are being ignored. They are the non-citizens of the world: aliens, stateless persons, and refugees, without the support of a government to protect them. Genocide and ethnic conflict are tearing families apart and forcing many victims to seek asylum in countries where they are arbitrarily detained or turned away. Seemingly well-meaning governments marred by bureaucratic indifference continue to deny sanctuary and legal protection to the one group of people who have nowhere else to turn.

Responsibility budgeting and accounting

Abstract Information/transaction costs make it necessary to decentralize some decision rights in organizations and in the economy. Decentralization in turn requires organizations to solve the control problem that results when self-interested persons do not behave as perfect agents. Capitalist economies solve these control problems through the institution of alienable decision rights. But because organizations suppress the alienability of decision rights, they must devise substitute mechanisms that perform those functions. Three functions are critical: (1) allocating decision rights among agents in the organization, (2) measuring and evaluating performance, and (3) rewarding and punishing individuals for their performance. Responsibility budgeting and accounting systems are the most widespread mechanisms for performing these functions in business today.

The European Convention and the Relative Rights of Resident Aliens

By virtue of conceptual abstraction, the notion of nationality plays a pivotal role in liberal democracies, governing distinctions in the allocation of ‘absolute’ and ‘relative’ rights, and determining that while national citizens, as full member of a sovereign political community, enjoy both human and political/social rights, resident aliens are excluded from the scope of these latter, community‐related, rights. Further, The European Convention upon Human Rights appears to countenance this dichotomy, allowing sovereign states to restrict the political activity of aliens. This paper nonetheless argues that such a distinction undermines the democratic imperative upon which liberal constitutional states are founded. A ‘social integration thesis,’ holding that individuals should enjoy, as a fundamental right, the possibility fully to develop their personalities though establishing and pursuing secure social contacts, as well as interpreting those contacts in the light of prevailing cultural perceptions, not only raises the right of stable residence to one of most fundamental attaching to the human condition, but also indicates that political rights—a mere extension of self‐expression and self‐fulfilment within civil society—should be recast as a universal entitlement. Article Three of the First Protocol ECHR may be construed in line with the social integration thesis, and consequently, in the matter of the definition of the members of the national community, the political sovereignty of the Nation State must be limited.

Temporary Workers or Future Citizens? Japanese and U.S. Migration Policies

List of Tables and Figures - Acknowledgements - List of Contributors -PART 1: INTRODUCTION - Opposing Visions: Migration and Citizenship Policies in Japan and the United States M.Weiner - PART 2: THE CHALLENGE OF MIGRANT INCORPORATION IN JAPAN AND THE UNITED STATES - Historical Conditions in the United States for Assimilating Immigrants R.Ueda - The Incorporation of Immigrants in the United States N.Glazer - A History of Japanese Emigration and Immigration, 1860s-1990s M.Tsuchida - The Challenge of Incorporating Foreigners in Japan: 'Ethnic Japanese' and 'Sociological Japanese' T.Kajita - PART 3: DO JAPAN AND THE UNITED STATES NEED MIGRANTS? - Does Japan Need Immigrants? K.Koshiro - The Economic Consequences of Immigration: The United States and Japan B.Chiswick - PART 4: RIGHTS AND BENEFITS - Japanese Policies on the Rights and Benefits of Foreign Workers, Residents and Illegals T.Hanami - The Legal Rights of Citizens and Aliens in the United States P.H.Schuck - PART 5: GERMANY'S MIGRATION POLICIES THROUGH AMERICAN AND JAPANESE EYES - What We Can Learn from the German Experiences Concerning Foreign Labour Y.Iguchi - The Perils and Promise of Pluralism: Lessons from the German Case for Japan T.U.Berger - PART 6: CONTROLLING MIGRATION - Japan's Dilemma: Can International Migration be Controlled? Y.Kuwahara - Appearances and Realities: Controlling Illegal Immigration in the United States W.R.Cornelius - PART 7: REFUGEE AND ASYLUM POLICIES - Japan's Responses to Refugees and Political Asylum-Seekers I.Takeda - US Responses to Refugees and Asylum-Seekers' M.Teitelbaum - Index

China's land arrangements and rural labor mobility

Chinese farm families under the Household Responsibility System have the land use-rights but not the rights of alienation. If permanently leaving agriculture, they have to return the land to local authorities and consequently give up a stream of future land earnings. This paper analyzes the deterrent effect of this land arrangement on labor mobility by constructing a household model which considers both part-time farming and permanent migration decisions. The implications of the model are consistent with the recent Chinese experience of rural floating population in cities and the rapid growth of rural nonagricultural employment.

The First Time as Tragedy, the Second Time Farce: Proposition 187, Section 1981, and the Rights of Aliens

THE FIRST TIME AS TRAGEDY, THE SECOND TIME FARCE: PROPOSITION 187, SECTION 1981, AND THE RIGHTS OF ALIENS Stephen M. Knightt The immigration problems of today [1926] had their counter- parts in the problems of yesterday, and students of present- day problems cannot afford to overlook the experience of the past with similar problems. 1 I. INTRODUCTION On November 8, 1994, Proposition 187 - which seeks to deny basic public services, including health care, education, and social services, 2 to persons determined by state and local officials t J.D., Hastings College of the Law, 1996; B.A., Yale University, 1987. This article is dedicated to Ralph Santiago Abascal (1935-1997) - whose idea it was that I write it in the first place - and to Sue Bailey Thurman (1903-1996). I would also like to thank Robert Rubin for his assistance. 1. HISTORICAL ASPECTS OF THE IMMIGRATION PROBLEM: SELECT Docu- MENrs x (Edith Abbott, ed., 1926). 2. Proposition 187 adds § 130 to Part 1, Division 1 of the California Health and Safety Code. Paragraph (a) provides: (a) In order to carry out the intention of the People of California that, excepting emergency medical care as required by federal law, only citizens of the United States and aliens lawfully admitted to the United States may receive the benefits of publicly-funded health care, and to ensure that all persons employed in the providing of those services shall diligently protect public funds from misuse, the provisions of this section are adopted. Proposition 187, § 6. The initiative adds § 48215 to the California Education Code. Paragraph (a) provides: (a) No public elementary or secondary school shall admit, or permit the attendance of, any child who is not a citizen of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted as a permanent resident, or a person who is otherwise authorized under federal law to be pres- ent in the United States. The section also adds § 66010.8 to the Education Code, which among other things requires: (a) No public institution of post-secondary education shall admit, en- roll, or permit the attendance of any person who is not a citizen of

Strangers to the Constitution: Immigrants, Borders, and Fundamental Law.

Gerald Neuman discusses in historical and contemporary terms the repeated efforts of U.S. insiders to claim the Constitution as their exclusive property and to deny con-stitutional rights to aliens and immigrants - and even citizens if they are outside the nation's borders. Tracing such efforts from the debates over the Alien and Sedition Acts in 1798 to present-day controversies about illegal aliens and their children, the author argues that no human being subject to the governance of the United States should be a stranger to the Constitution. Thus, whenever the government asserts its power to impose obligations on individuals, it brings them within the constitutional system and should afford them constitutional rights. In Neuman's view, this mutuality of obligation is the most persuasive approach to extending constitutional rights extraterritorially to all U.S. citizens and to those aliens on whom the United States seeks to impose legal responsibilities. Examining both mutuality and more flexible theories, Neuman defends some constitutional con-straints on immigration and deportation policies and argues that the political rights of aliens need not exclude suffrage. Finally, in regard to whether children born in the United States to illegally present alien parents should be U.S. citizens, he concludes that the Constitution's traditional shield against the emergence of a hereditary caste of illegals should be vigilantly preserved.

The Hierarchy of Violence in Twelfth- and Thirteenth-Century Canonists

sources and modern scholarly discussions of the large-scale military attacks upon religious enemies mounted by medieval Christian authorities describe these attacks by terms such as 'just war', 'holy war', 'crusade', and 'sacred violence'. Twentieth-century writers still use these categories to describe modern conflicts that they wish to justify by invoking idealistic motives that purport to legitimize hostilities. When General Eisenhower entitled his memoir of the Second World War Crusade in Europe, he doubtless meant to use 'crusade' as a metaphor in this way.1 When the Franco government entitled its account of the Spanish Civil War A History of the Spanish Crusade, however, the work was predicated on the belief that the struggle had been quite literally a crusade, because it was authorized by ecclesiastical authorities and fought in the name of religion.2 This essay, therefore, addresses a recurring problem in legal and historical taxonomy. On a different level, international public law continues to distinguish between just (or legitimate) wars and what are now called 'wars of aggression',3 and that distinction can entail significant legal consequences.4 The status of a conflict in international law may substantially affect such concrete matters as, for example, the public property of hostile states, the assets and other property rights of enemy aliens,5

The Recognition of Executory Contracts

Abstract This paper examines the nature of executory contracts using as examples forward exchange contracts, asset purchase commitments and leases. FECs are paid particular attention as they have not previously been the focus of discussions concerning executory contracts. The arguments in the literature for recognition of wholly executory contracts can be summarised as follows: recognition provides more relevant information for decision making and is therefore useful; and the contractual rights satisfy the control criterion required by most asset and liability definitions if the contract is firm, thereby evidencing the commitment of the parties. It is argued in this paper that the decision usefulness argument neglects representational faithfulness as it recognises rights that a party does not control; the rights under the contract can be separately identified as rights of alienation and use or conversion; and an approach using deprivai value provides a better indication of commitment than firmness.

Hammel v. Madagascar

Human rights — Arrest and detention — Habeas corpus — Rights of aliens — Access to counsel — Expulsion — Exhaustion of domestic remedies — Application of remedies unreasonably prolonged — National security — International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966International tribunals — Procedure — United Nations Human Rights Committee — Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 — Domestic remedies — Admissibility

International Procedures for Protecting the Human Rights of Non-Citizens

International Procedures for Protecting the Human Rights of Non-Citizens

Community perception of social welfare and its relations to familism, political alienation, and individual rights: the case of Hong Kong

Community perception of social welfare and its relations to familism, political alienation, and individual rights: the case of Hong Kong

Ownership and the Nature of the Firm

This paper looks at the institution of the ownership of firms from a theoretical and comparative standpoint. The joining of control, utilization, and alienation rights and the practical association of ownership with financing and risk-bearing roles are considered. Variations in ownership concentration, in the level of inside ownership, and in owner versus nonowner finance are explained with reference to capitalization requirements, agency costs, diversification motives, and asset specificity. The agency cost of separating ownership from work, the rationales and ownership dimensions of public and nonprofit providers, and the agency costs of public ownership are also discussed. J. Comp. Econom., June 1993, 17(2), pp. 243-263. Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island 02912.

On the strategic inconsistency of the meta-rights approach

Among many attempts to circumvent Sen's impossibility result Gibbard's theory of alienable rights has attracted attention of many researchers. Basu's (1984) theorem essentially depends on a Nash-type equilibrium concept. In this paper we introduce an alternative behavioral assumption where individuals have “conjectures” about the responses of others and investigate the robustness of Basu's result under this new solution concept. We also examine a possibility of coalition formation and cooperation under the “meta-rights approach.”

Conflicting Visions: A Critique of Ian Macneil's Relational Theory of Contract

* Norman & Edna Freehling Scholar and Professor of Law, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago-Kent College of Law. Some of the ideas developed in this paper were presented to the Contracts Section of the Association of American Law Schools as part of a panel on The Relational Theory of held at the 1988 Annual Meeting in Miami Beach, Florida. Financial support for this project was provided by the Marshall D. Ewell Research Fund of the Chicago-Kent College of Law. Research assistance was provided by Craig Truitt. Finally, I wish to thank Jay Feinman for commenting on an earlier draft. I I introduced this thesis in Randy E. Barnett, Contract Scholarship and the Reemergence of Legal Philosophy, 97 Harv. L. Rev. 1223 (1984) (book review), and greatly expanded it in Randy E. Barnett, A Consent Theory of Contract, 86 Colum. L. Rev. 269 (1986) [hereinafter Barnett, Consent Theory]. A condensed and revised account of this approach appears in Randy E. Barnett, Rights and Remedies in a Consent Theory of Contract, in Liability and Responsibility: Essays in Law and Morals 135 (R.G. Frey & Christopher W. Morris eds., 1991). 2 Although these two expressions of the principle serve well for most purposes, they are not strictly accurate. A more complete formulation is that contractual obligation arises when a person voluntarily performed acts that conveyed her intention to create a legally enforceable obligation by transferring alienable rights. Barnett, Consent Theory, supra note 1, at 300. This more elaborate version is needed to account for the restrictions that are properly placed on people's ability to legally bind themselves. This limitation is reflected in, for example, the rules governing the remedy of specific performance. See Randy E. Barnett, Contract Remedies and Inalienable Rights, 4 Soc. Phil. & Pol'y 179 (1986). Although I describe this as the traditional view, it represents a rejection of the modern Willistonian-Restatement approach that places the concept of promise (as opposed to consent) at the heart of contract. A promise may or may not be accompanied by an explicit or implicit manifestation of intention to be legally bound. See Randy E. Barnett, Some Problems with Contract as Promise, 77 Cornell L. Rev. 1022 (1992).