“The Harvard Immigration and Refugee Clinical Program hummed with activity late into the night as students worked on amicus briefs and human rights abuse documentation for clients. Founded and directed by asylum scholar and Clinical Professor Deborah Anker LL.M. ’84, the Harvard Law program has involved students in the direct representation of asylum seekers and…
Read more
I never expected to put my legislative advocacy skills to work in academia until the presidential election, when immigration issues changed overnight. Along with more than 300 students at Harvard Law School, I joined the Immigration Response Initiative, volunteering to help HIRC and advocacy groups.
Earlier this week, the Harvard Immigration and Refugee Clinical Program (HIRC) co-authored a brief to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) on the “material support” bar to asylum, arguing that the word “material” must be given independent meaning in order to ensure that victims of terrorism are not unfairly denied humanitarian protection.
When my clinical instructor, Sabi Ardalan, told me about an opportunity to present at a workshop at UMass Boston (UMB) on the implications of the recent executive orders, I immediately signed up. Remembering that sense of hopelessness I felt as a non-citizen, I thought that empowering immigrants with knowledge of the executive orders and their rights was one of the best ways I could contribute.
The Crimmigration Clinic at the Harvard Immigration and Refugee Clinical Program recently filed an amicus curiae brief in support of a lawsuit arguing that it is unlawful for state law enforcement agencies to arrest and detain an individual in Massachusetts solely for immigration enforcement purposes.
Despite the glaring absence of the U.S. government officials, we civil society organizations had productive conversations with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. Malene and I testified that the executive orders greatly curtail asylum seekers’ ability to meaningfully pursue their claims for protection and increase the risk of deportation to countries where they face persecution or torture.
The Harvard Immigration and Refugee Clinical Program (HIRC) filed on Thursday an amicus curiae brief in support of a lawsuit that seeks, among other things, to prevent the Trump administration from lowering the number of refugees that can be allowed into the country. The lawsuit, filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the International…
Read more
The 3rd floor wing of Wasserstein Hall that houses the Harvard Law School Immigration and Refugee Clinic is often a hub of activity. But last Friday, it was packed to capacity. Students perched on the arms of couches, crowded in corners, and angled for space around a small table. The call had gone out looking…
Read more
The Harvard Immigration and Refugee Clinical Program (HIRC) filed an amicus curiae brief today in the Eastern District of New York case against President Trump’s Muslim Ban, one of several cases currently challenging the president’s actions on immigration. The case, Darweesh v. Trump, focuses on the President’s authority to ban entry into the United States on…
Read more