WorldCat Identities

Garcia, Michael John

Overview
Works: 84 works in 213 publications in 1 language and 3,081 library holdings
Genres: Treaties  Trials, litigation, etc 
Roles: Author
Publication Timeline
.
Most widely held works by Michael John Garcia
Immigration : terrorist grounds for exclusion of aliens by Michael John Garcia( Book )

22 editions published between 2004 and 2015 in English and held by 74 WorldCat member libraries worldwide

This report focuses on the terrorism-related grounds for inadmissibility and deportation/removal. It opens with an overview of the terror-related grounds as they evolved through key legislation enacted in recent years. The section on current law explains the legal definitions of "terrorist activity," "engage in terrorist activity," and "terrorist organization," and describes the terror-related grounds for inadmissibility and removal. The report then discusses the alien screening process to determine admissibility and to identify possible terrorists, both during the visa issuance process abroad and the inspections process at U.S. ports of entry
Immigration consequences of criminal activity by Michael John Garcia( Book )

10 editions published between 2004 and 2007 in English and held by 70 WorldCat member libraries worldwide

Congress has broad plenary authority to determine classes of aliens who may be admitted into the United States and the grounds for which they may be removed. Pursuant to the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), as amended, certain conduct may either disqualify an alien from entering the United States ("inadmissibility") or provide grounds for his or her removal/deportation. Prominently included among this conduct is criminal activity. "Criminal activity" comprises acts violative of federal, state, or, in many cases, foreign criminal law. It does not cover violations of the INA that are not crimes -- most notably, being in the U.S. without legal permission. Thus, the term "illegal alien"--An alien without legal status -- is not synonymous with "criminal alien." Most crimes affecting immigration status are not specifically mentioned by the INA, but instead fall under a broad category of crimes, such as crimes involving moral turpitude or aggravated felonies. In addition, certain criminal conduct precludes a finding of good moral character under the INA, which is a requirement for naturalization and certain types of immigration relief. In certain circumstances, grounds for inadmissibility or deportation may be waived. In some cases, aliens facing removal may be allowed to remain in the United States -- for example, when they are granted discretionary or mandatory relief from removal for humanitarian reasons, such as through asylum, withholding of removal, or cancellation of removal. Criminal conduct may affect an alien's eligibility for either voluntary departure or discretionary relief from removal. Additionally, criminal conduct is a key disqualifying factor under the character requirement for naturalization. Immigration reform will likely be an issue in the 110th Congress, and legislative proposals may contain provisions modifying the immigration consequences of criminal activity. In the 109th Congress, several proposals were considered to comprehensively reform the immigration system. While these proposals were often divergent in approach, most would have expanded the categories of criminal activity making aliens inadmissible, removable, and/or ineligible for certain forms of relief from removal. Whether similar such proposals will be made in the 110th Congress remains to be seen
Border security : barriers along the U.S. international border by Blas Nunez-Neto( Book )

9 editions published between 2008 and 2009 in English and Undetermined and held by 38 WorldCat member libraries worldwide

Congress has repeatedly shown interest in examining and expanding the barriers being deployed along the U.S. international land border. The 109th Congress passed a number of laws affecting these barriers, and oversight of these laws and of the construction process may be of interest to the 110th Congress. The United States Border Patrol (USBP) deploys fencing, which aims to impede the illegal entry of individuals, and vehicle barriers, which aim to impede the illegal entry of vehicles (but not individuals) along the border. The USBP first began erecting barriers in 1990 to deter illegal entries and drug smuggling in its San Diego sector. The ensuing 14 mile-long San Diego "primary fence" formed part of the USBP's "Prevention Through Deterrence" strategy, which called for reducing unauthorised migration by placing agents and resources directly on the border along population centres in order to deter would-be migrants from entering the country. In 1996, Congress passed the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act which, among other things, explicitly gave the Attorney General (now the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security) broad authority to construct barriers along the border and authorised the construction of a secondary layer of fencing to buttress the completed 14 mile primary fence. Construction of the secondary fence stalled due to environmental concerns raised by the California Coastal Commission. In 2005, Congress passed the REAL ID Act that authorised the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to waive all legal requirements in order to expedite the construction of border barriers. DHS has announced it will use this waiver authority to complete the San Diego fence. The Secure Fence Act of 2006 directed DHS to construct 850 miles of additional border fencing. This requirement was subsequently modified by the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-161), which was enacted into law on December 26, 2007. The act requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to construct fencing along not less than 700 miles of the south-west border. While the San Diego fence, combined with an increase in agents and other resources in the USBP's San Diego sector, has proven effective in reducing the number of apprehensions made in that sector, there is considerable evidence that the flow of illegal immigration has adapted to this enforcement posture and has shifted to the more remote areas of the Arizona desert. Nationally, the USBP made 1.2 million apprehensions in 1992 and again in 2004, suggesting that the increased enforcement in San Diego sector has had little impact on overall apprehensions. In addition to border fencing, the USBP deploys both permanent and temporary vehicle barriers to the border. Temporary vehicle barriers are typically chained together and can be moved to different locations at the USBP's discretion. Permanent vehicle barriers are embedded in the ground and are meant to remain in one location. A number of policy issues concerning border barriers generally and fencing specifically may be of interest to Congress, including, but not limited, to their effectiveness, costs versus benefits, location, design, environmental impact, potential diplomatic ramifications, and the costs of acquiring the land needed for construction
Renditions : constraints imposed by laws on torture by Michael John Garcia( Book )

11 editions published between 2005 and 2009 in English and held by 25 WorldCat member libraries worldwide

Persons suspected of terrorist activity may be transferred from State (i.e., country) for arrest, detention, and/or interrogation. Commonly, this is done through extradition, by which one State surrenders a person within its jurisdiction to a requesting Stae via a formal legal process, typically established by treaty. Far less often, such transfers are effectuated through a process known as "extraordinary rendition" or "irregular rendition." These terms have often been used to refer to the extrajudicial transfer of a person from one State to another. In this report, "rendition" refers to extraordinary or irregular renditions unless otherwise specified. Although the particularities regarding the usage of extraordinary renditions and the legal authority behind such renditions is not publically available, various U.S. officials have acknowledged the practice's existence. Recently, there has been some controversy as to the usage of renditions by the United States, particularly with regard to the alleged transfer of suspected terrorists to countries known to emply harsh interrogaton techniques that may rise to the level of torture, purportedly with the knowledge or acquiescence of the United States. This report discusses relevant international and domestic law restricting the transfer of persons to foreign states for the purpose of torture
Implications of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations upon the regulation of consular identification cards by Jennifer Elsea( Book )

3 editions published in 2005 in English and held by 18 WorldCat member libraries worldwide

Recent controversy regarding the use of consular identification cards (IDs) by aliens within the United States, in particular Mexico's matricula consular, has led to calls for legislation to regulate the issuance of the cards by foreign missions or their acceptance by U.S. government and private entities. This report identifies possible implications that U.S. regulation or monitoring of the issuance of these cards by foreign missions might have upon U.S. obligations under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VCCR), which protects foreign missions in the exercise of their legitimate consular functions and codifies customary international law with respect to the inviolability of consular premises and documents. The REAL ID Act (P.L. 109-13, Division B) prohibits states, when issuing drivers licenses or state ID cards, from accepting for purposes of personal identification foreign documents other than valid passports, if such drivers licenses or ID cards are to be accepted for federal purposes. Other recent legislative proposals aimed at restricting the acceptance (but not the issuance) of consular IDs include H.R. 688, the SAFER Act, introduced by Representative J. Gresham Barrett on February 9, 2005; H.R. 815, the Financial Customer Identification Verification Improvement Act, introduced by Representative Scott Garrett on February 15, 2005; and H.R. 925, the Identification Integrity Act of 2005, introduced by Representative Elton Gallegly on February 17, 2005
Closing the Guantanamo Detention Center : legal issues( Book )

14 editions published between 2009 and 2011 in English and held by 14 WorldCat member libraries worldwide

This report provides an overview of major legal issues likely to arise in the event of executive and/or legislative action to close the Guantanamo detention facility. It discusses legal issues related to the transfer or release of Guantanamo detainees (either to a foreign country or into the United States), the continued detention of such persons in the United States, and the possible removal of persons brought to the United States. The report also discusses selected constitutional issues that may arise in the criminal prosecution of detainees, emphasizing the procedural and substantive protections that are utilized in different adjudicatory forums (I.e., federal civilian courts, court-martial proceedings, and military commissions). Issues discussed include detainees' right to a speedy trial, the prohibition against prosecution under ex post facto laws, and limitations upon the admissibility of hearsay and secret evidence in criminal cases
The war crimes act current issues by Michael John Garcia( Book )

6 editions published between 2006 and 2009 in English and held by 5 WorldCat member libraries worldwide

The War Crimes Act of 1996, as amended, makes it a criminal offense to commit certain violations of the laws of war when such offenses are committed by or against U.S. nationals or Armed Service members. Among other things, the act prohibits certain violations of Common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, which sets out minimum standards for the treatment of detainees in armed conflicts of a non-international character. Common Article 3 prohibits protected persons from being subjected to violence, outrages upon personal dignity, torture, and cruel, humiliating, or degrading treatment. In the 2006 case of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, the Supreme Court rejected the Bush Administration's long-standing position that Common Article 3 was inapplicable to the present armed conflict with Al Qaeda. As a result, questions have arisen regarding the scope of the War Crimes Act as it relates to violations of Common Article 3 and the possibility that U.S. personnel may be prosecuted for the pre-Hamdan treatment of Al Qaeda detainees. As amended by the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA, P.L. 109-366), the War Crimes Act now criminalizes only specified Common Article 3 violations labeled as "grave breaches." Previously, any violation of Common Article 3 constituted a criminal offense. This report discusses current issues related to the War Crimes Act. This report also briefly describes legislation introduced in the first session of the 110th Congress that would amend the War Crimes Act
Congressional oversight and related issues concerning international security agreements concluded by the United States by Michael John Garcia( Book )

3 editions published in 2009 in English and held by 2 WorldCat member libraries worldwide

"The United States is a party to numerous security agreements with other nations. The topics covered, along with the significance of the obligations imposed upon agreement parties, may vary. Some international security agreements entered by the United States, such as those obliging parties to come to the defense of another in the event of an attack, involve substantial commitments and have traditionally been entered as treaties, ratified with the advice and consent of the Senate. Other agreements dealing with more technical matters, such as military basing rights or the application of a host country's laws to U.S. forces stationed within, are entered more routinely and usually take a form other than treaty (i.e., as an executive agreement or a nonlegal political commitment). Occasionally, the substance and form of a proposed security agreement may become a source of dispute between Congress and the executive branch. In November 2007, the Bush Administration announced its intention to negotiate a long-term security agreement with Iraq that would have committed the United States to provide security assurances to Iraq, and contemplated a long-term presence by U.S. forces in Iraq. This announcement became a source of congressional interest, in part because of statements by Administration officials that such an agreement would not be submitted to the legislative branch for approval. Congressional concern appeared to dissipate when U.S.-Iraq negotiations culminated in an agreement that did not contain a long-term, legally binding security commitment by the United States, but instead called for the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq by December 31, 2011. It is likely that future disputes will arise between the political branches regarding the entering or implementation of international security agreements. Regardless of the form a security arrangement may take, Congress has several tools to exercise oversight regarding the negotiation, form, conclusion, and implementation of the agreement by the United States. This report begins by providing a general background on the types of international agreements that are binding upon the United States, as well as considerations affecting whether they take the form of a treaty or an executive agreement. Next, the report discusses historical precedents as to the role that security agreements have taken, with specific attention paid to past agreements entered with Afghanistan, Germany, Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, and Iraq. The report discusses the oversight role that Congress exercises with respect to entering and implementing international agreements involving the United States. For more information regarding the U.S.-Iraq security agreements, see CRS Report R40011, U.S.-Iraq Withdrawal/Status of Forces Agreement: Issues for Congressional Oversight, by R. Chuck Mason, and CRS Report RL34568, U.S.-Iraq Agreements: Congressional Oversight Activities and Legislative Response, by Matthew C. Weed."
State efforts to deter unauthorized aliens : legal analysis of Arizona's S.B. 1070 by Michael John Garcia( Book )

2 editions published in 2010 in English and held by 2 WorldCat member libraries worldwide

In recent decades, Congress has increasingly focused federal immigration policy on the daily incidents of alien residency. Concomitantly, Congress has enlarged the opportunities for states to become involved in enforcing immigration law. S.B. 1070 is in the vanguard of testing the legal limits of these increased opportunities, though H.B. 2162 modified some of its more legally ambitious efforts. To a large extent, the legal fate of Arizona's attempts to supplement federal immigration enforcement efforts may depend on how its individual provisions are implemented. Until then, it may be difficult to determine whether Arizona's assertion of concurrent authority to affect unauthorized immigration is regarded as complementing federal efforts or as being counterproductive to them. At least some other states and localities that see themselves as heavily impacted by unauthorized immigration likely will join Arizona on any new ground that S.B. 1070 establishes. And this potential for diverse and possibly fragmented immigration enforcement doubtless will be among the many issues considered by the courts as legal challenges to S.B. 1070 proceed
Detainee provisions in the National Defense Authorization Bills by Jennifer Elsea( Book )

2 editions published in 2011 in English and held by 1 WorldCat member library worldwide

Both House and Senate bills competing to become the National Defense Authorization Act of FY2012 contain a subtitle addressing issues related to detainees at the U.S. Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and more broadly, hostilities against Al Qaeda and other entities. At the heart of both bills' detainee provisions appears to be an effort to confirm or, as some observers view it, expand the detention authority that Congress implicitly granted the President via the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF, P.L. 107-40) in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. This report offers a brief background of the salient issues raised by the bills regarding detention matters, provides a section-by-section analysis of the relevant subdivision of each bill, and compares the bills' approach with respect to the major issues they address
Wartime detention provisions in recent defense authorization legislation by Jennifer Elsea( Book )

2 editions published between 2014 and 2015 in English and held by 1 WorldCat member library worldwide

This report offers a brief background of the salient issues raised by the detainee provisions of the FY2012 NDAA, provides a section-by-section analysis, and discusses executive interpretation and implementation of the act's mandatory military detention provision. It also addresses detainee provisions in the 2013 NDAA and 2014 NDAA, as well as those found in the competing House and Senate defense authorization bills for FY2015
War powers litigation initiated by members of Congress since the enactment of the War Powers Resolution by Michael John Garcia( Book )

2 editions published between 2011 and 2012 in English and held by 1 WorldCat member library worldwide

Presidents have continued to maintain that they have sufficient authority independent of Congress to initiate the use of military force; and several Presidents have viewed aspects of the WPR as unconstitutionally infringing upon their Commander-in-Chief authority. Congress has on four occasions enacted authorizations specifically waiving the 60-90 day limitation on the use of force otherwise imposed by the WPR. But on eight occasions Members of Congress have filed suit to force various Presidents to comply with WPR requirements or otherwise to recognize Congress's war powers under the Constitution. In six of the seven cases where final rulings were issued, the courts have found reasons not to render a decision on the merits of the plaintiffs' claims. This report summarizes the seven cases initiated by Members of Congress in which final rulings were reached, which concerned U.S. military activities in El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Grenada; military action taken the during Persian Gulf conflict between Iraq and Iran; U.S. activities in response to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait (prior to the congressional authorization); and U.S. participation in NATO's action in Kosovo and Yugoslavia. This report also briefly discusses the current legal challenge to enjoin further military action against Libya, and discusses more generally the debate surrounding the WPR's application to these military operations
Interrogation of detainees : requirements of the Detainee Treatment Act by Michael John Garcia( Book )

2 editions published in 2009 in English and held by 1 WorldCat member library worldwide

U.S. treatment of enemy combatants and terrorist suspects captured in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other locations has been a subject of long-standing debate, including whether such treatment complies with U.S. statutes and treaties such as the 1949 Geneva Conventions and the Convention Against Torture (CAT). In response to this controversy, Congress approved additional guidelines concerning the treatment of detainees via the Detainee Treatment Act (DTA), which was enacted pursuant to both the Department of Defense, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations to Address Hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico, and Pandemic Influenza Act, 2006 (P.L. 109-148, Title X), and the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2006 (P.L. 109-163, Title XIV). Among other things, the DTA contains provisions that (1) require Department of Defense (DoD) personnel to employ United States Army Field Manual guidelines while interrogating detainees, and (2) prohibit the "cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment of persons under the detention, custody, or control of the United States Government." These provisions of the DTA, which were first introduced by Senator John McCain, have popularly been referred to as the "McCain Amendment." This report discusses provisions of the DTA concerning standards for the interrogation and treatment of detainees
Unaccompanied alien children : legal issues : answers to frequently asked questions by Kate Manuel( )

1 edition published in 2014 in English and held by 0 WorldCat member libraries worldwide

Recent reports about the increasing number of alien minors apprehended at the U.S. border without a parent or legal guardian have prompted numerous questions about so-called unaccompanied alien children (UACs). Some of these questions pertain to the numbers of children involved, their reasons for coming to the United States, and current and potential responses of the federal government and other entities to their arrival. Other questions concern the interpretation and interplay of various federal statutes and regulations, administrative and judicial decisions, and settlement agreements pertaining to alien minors. This report addresses the latter questions, providing general and relatively brief answers to 14 frequently asked questions regarding UACs
Congressional authority to limit military operations by Jennifer Elsea( )

1 edition published in 2011 in English and held by 0 WorldCat member libraries worldwide

Controversy continues over the appropriate role that Congress should play in regulating U.S. military operations against foreign entities. U.S. action against Libya reignited consideration of long-standing questions concerning the President's constitutional authority to use military force without congressional authorization, as well as congressional authority to regulate or limit the use of such force. As Congress considers defense authorization and appropriations bills for FY2012, there may be a renewed focus on whether or to what extent Congress has the constitutional authority to legislate limits on the President's authority to conduct military operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, or other locations. This report begins by discussing constitutional provisions allocating war powers between Congress and the President, and presenting a historical overview of relevant court cases. It considers Congress's constitutional authority to end a military conflict via legislative action; the implications that the War Powers Resolution or the repeal of prior military authorization may have upon the continued use of military force; and other considerations which may inform congressional decisions to limit the use of military force via statutory command or through funding limitations. The report discusses Congress's ability to limit funding for U.S. participation in hostilities, examining relevant court cases and prior measures taken by Congress to restrict military operations, as well as possible alternative avenues to fund these activities in the event that appropriations are cut. The report then provides historical examples of measures that restrict the use of particular personnel, and concludes with a brief analysis of arguments that might be brought to bear on the question of Congress's authority to limit the availability of troops to serve in ongoing military operations. Although not beyond debate, such limitations appear to be within Congress's authority to allocate resources for military operations
Executive discretion as to immigration : legal overview by Kate Manuel( )

1 edition published in 2014 in English and held by 0 WorldCat member libraries worldwide

"President Obama announced in June 2014 that he would seek 'to fix as much of our immigration system as I can on my own' through administrative action. Although the Obama Administration has not yet announced the specific immigration actions it intends to take, the President has stated that they will occur before the end of the year. It seems likely that such actions will prompt heated legal debate concerning the scope of the Executive's discretionary authority over immigration matters, including with respect to the enforcement of immigration-related sanctions and the granting of immigration benefits or privileges. Such debate may be similar to that which followed the 2012 launch of the executive initiative commonly known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), under which certain unlawfully present aliens who were brought to the United States as children may be granted 'deferred action' (a type of relief from removal) and work authorization. While some have argued that DACA constitutes an abdication of the Executive's duty to enforce the laws and runs afoul of specific requirements found in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), others have argued that the initiative is a lawful exercise of the discretionary authority conferred on the Executive by the Constitution and federal statute. Executive discretion over immigration matters is informed (and, in some instances, circumscribed) by statutory delegations of authority and constitutional considerations. In some cases, a particular immigration policy or initiative might be premised on multiple sources of discretionary authority"--Preliminary page
"Sanctuary cities" : legal issues by Yule Kim( )

1 edition published in 2008 in English and held by 0 WorldCat member libraries worldwide

Controversy has arisen over the existence of so-called "sanctuary cities." The term "sanctuary city" is not defined by federal law, but is often used to refer to those localities which, as a result of a state or local act, ordinance, policy, or fiscal constraints, limit their assistance to federal immigration authorities seeking to apprehend and remove unauthorized aliens
Arizona v. United States : a limited role for states in immigration enforcement by Kate Manuel( )

1 edition published in 2012 in English and held by 0 WorldCat member libraries worldwide

On June 25, 2012, the Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated decision in Arizona v. United States, ruling that some aspects of an Arizona statute intended to deter unlawfully present aliens from remaining in the state were preempted by federal law, but also holding that Arizona police were not facially preempted from running immigration status checks on persons stopped for state or local offenses. In reaching these conclusions, the Supreme Court made clear that opportunities for states to take independent action in the field of immigration enforcement are more constrained than some had previously believed
Authority of state and local police to enforce federal immigration law by Michael John Garcia( )

1 edition published in 2010 in English and held by 0 WorldCat member libraries worldwide

This report discusses the authority of state and local law enforcement to assist in the enforcement of federal immigration law through the investigation and arrest of persons believed to have violated such laws. It describes current provisions in federal law that permit state and local police to enforce immigration law directly, analyzes major cases concerning the ability of states and localities to assist in immigration enforcement, and examines opinions on the issue by the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) within the Department of Justice
Boumediene v. Bush : Guantanamo detainees' right to habeas corpus by Michael John Garcia( )

1 edition published in 2008 in English and held by 0 WorldCat member libraries worldwide

In the consolidated cases of Boumediene v. Bush and Al Odah v. United States, decided June 12, 2008, the Supreme Court held in a 5-4 opinion that aliens designated as enemy combatants and detained at the U.S. Naval Station in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, have the constitutional privilege of habeas corpus. The Court also found that ss7 of the Military Commissions Act (MCA), which limited judicial review of executive determinations of the petitioners' enemy combatant status, did not provide an adequate habeas substitute and therefore acted as an unconstitutional suspension of the writ of habeas. The immediate impact of the Boumediene decision is that detainees at Guantanamo may petition a federal district court for habeas review of the circumstances of their detention. This report summarizes the Boumediene decision and analyzes several of its major implications for the U.S. detention of alien enemy combatants and legislation that limits detainees' access to judicial review
 
moreShow More Titles
fewerShow Fewer Titles
Audience Level
0
Audience Level
1
  Kids General Special  
Audience level: 0.49 (from 0.03 for Border sec ... to 0.60 for Immigratio ...)

Border security : barriers along the U.S. international border
Alternative Names
John Garcia

Michael John Garcia Amerikaans advocaat

Languages
English (94)

Covers