The Emerging Importance of Social Visibility in Defining a Particular Social Group and Its Potential Impact on Asylum Claims Related to Sexual Orientation and Gender

An emerging issue in U.S. asylum claims based on membership in a particular social group is the relevance of social visibility in determining whether such a group exists. Of the five protected grounds for asylum, membership in a particular social group has always generated the most debate. In 2002, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) issued guidelines that present the protected characteristic and social perception approaches as alternative ways of establishing a particular social group, instructing States Parties to the 1951 Refugee Convention (the Convention ) to determine first if there is a protected characteristic and, only if no such characteristic exists, to determine whether the group is recognized by society. The author argues that adjudicators should reject the social visibility approach because it destroys Acosta\u27s principled framework, represents an abdication of U.S. obligations under the 1967 Protocol, cannot be applied in a consistent way, and ignores the complex relationship between visibility and power

Immigration Challenges of the Past Decade and Future Reforms

Over the past decade, immigrants have faced numerous challenges in the United States, including a dramatic increase in deportations, the expansion and privatization of immigration detention, major changes to the asylum system combined with drastic cutbacks in refugee admissions, and a new wave of racism and xenophobia. This Article discusses these challenges and explores possible ways to address them in 2020 and beyond

Kyste hydatique à localisation costo vertébrale

L'hydatidose est une affection parasitaire due à la contamination de l'homme par la forme larvaire de ténia échinococcus granulosus, la forme costo vertébrale est une localisation très rare qui représente 0,18 à 1,21% de l’ensemble des localisations hydatiques. Nous rapportons le cas d'une femme de 32 ans qui présente un kyste hydatique multi vésiculaire à localisation costovertébrale, traité par chirurgie radicale associée à un traitement médical anti parasitaire pour une durée de 6 mois, avec bonne évolution. L’atteinte costo-vertébrale par la maladie hydatique est rare et l’évolution est insidieuse. Malgré un traitement chirurgical radical, la fréquence des récidives rend le pronostic sombre

Intelligent Tutoring System for Teaching "Introduction to Computer Science" in Al-Azhar University, Gaza

ITS (Intelligent Tutoring System) is a computer software that supplies direct and adaptive training or response to students without, or with little human teacher interfering. The main target of ITS is smoothing the learning-teaching process using the ultimate technology in computer science. The proposed system will be implemented using the “ITSB” Authoring tool. The book "Introduction To Computer Science" is taught in Al-Azhar University in Gaza as a compulsory subject for students who study at humanities faculties. In this thesis, the researcher demonstrates an intelligent tutoring system for teaching the above mentioned subject. The system was assessed by a group of teachers and students and the results were promising

Invoking Federal Common Law Defenses in Immigration Cases

This Article argues that we should take a deeper look at the applicability of federal common law defenses in immigration cases. In the rare cases where noncitizens attempt to raise common law defenses, such arguments tend to be dismissed offhand by immigration judges simply because removal proceedings are technically civil, not criminal. Yet many common-law defenses may be raised in civil cases. Additionally, immigration proceedings have become increasingly intertwined with the criminal system. After examining how judges already rely on federal common law to fill in gaps in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), this Article proposes three categories of removal cases where federal common law defenses are particularly viable. The first category involves INA provisions that require conduct to be unlawful without requiring a conviction; the second category involves INA provisions barring asylum, which are closely connected to principles of criminal culpability; and the third category involves certain grounds of removal with no explicit mens rea requirement. Finally, the Article examines some of the legal and practical challenges to prevailing with these defenses in the removal context, drawing on criminal cases where such defenses have been raised to immigration-related charges. The Article concludes that a more principled approach to the use of federal common law defenses in removal proceedings is necessary in order to promote consistent and fair adjudication

Regional Immigration Enforcement

Regional disparities in immigration enforcement have existed for decades, yet they remain largely overlooked in immigration law scholarship. This Article theorizes that bottom-up pressure from states and localities, combined with top-down pressures and policies established by the President, produce these regional disparities. The Article then provides an empirical analysis demonstrating enormous variations in how Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s twenty-four field offices engage in federal enforcement around the United States. By analyzing data related to detainers, arrests, removals, and detention across these field offices, the Article demonstrates substantial differences between field offices located in sanctuary and anti-sanctuary regions, as well as variations within each of those groups. In order to promote more equitable and transparent enforcement, the Article offers recommendations regarding agency guidelines, rulemaking, performance metrics, and institutional designs, examining the strengths and limitations of these approaches

Extraterritorial Rights in Border Enforcement

Recent shifts in border enforcement policies raise pressing new questions about the extraterritorial reach of constitutional rights. Policies that keep asylum seekers in Mexico, expand the use of expedited removal, and encourage the cross-border use of force require courts to determine whether noncitizens who are physically outside the United States, or who are treated for legal purposes as being outside even if they have entered the country, can claim constitutional protections. This Article examines a small but growing body of cases addressing these extraterritoriality issues in the border enforcement context, focusing on disparities in judicial analyses that have resulted in at least two circuit splits. Specifically, the Article explores differences in courts’ selection and application of the Supreme Court’s main extraterritoriality tests; various ways of conceptualizing the interaction between the Court’s extraterritoriality jurisprudence and the plenary power doctrine, which one appellate court described as “competing” constitutional fields; and contrasting approaches to the role of separation of powers as a limiting structural principle, given the ambiguity of the Constitution’s text regarding is geographic scope. The separation of powers analysis reflects particular concerns about the executive branch’s manipulation of the border as a legal construct, as well as its manipulation of national security as an illusory threat, in order to evade accountability. The Article concludes that extending constitutional protections, preserving judicial review, and critically examining demands for deference are crucial in this context in order to avoid creating a law-free zone just beyond our southern border

Immigration Detention and Illusory Alternatives to Habeas

The Supreme Court has never directly addressed whether, or under what circumstances, a writ of habeas corpus may be used to challenge the conditions of detention, as opposed to the fact or duration of detention. Consequently, a circuit split exists on habeas jurisdiction over conditions claims. The COVID-19 pandemic brought this issue into the spotlight as detained individuals fearing infection, serious illness, and death requested release through habeas petitions around the country. One of the factors that courts considered in deciding whether to exercise habeas jurisdiction was whether alternative remedies exist, through a civil rights or tort-based action. This Article examines that question in depth, focusing specifically on the availability of meaningful alternatives for detained noncitizens. The Article analyzes challenges for noncitizens in bringing civil rights actions under Section 1983 or Bivens, tort actions under the Federal Tort Claims Act and state tort laws, and actions for injunctive relief directly under the Fifth Amendment and under the Administrative Procedure Act. By demonstrating that meaningful alternatives to habeas are often illusory for detained noncitizens, the Article argues that courts should err on the side of exercising habeas jurisdiction instead of making cursory conclusions that alternative remedies can be pursued

AXIAL BEHAVIOR OF CONCRETE CONFINED WITH FLAX FIBER-REINFORCED POLYMERS

KETEN ELYAF KATKILI POLİMER KOMPOZİTLERLE SARGILANMIŞ BETONUN EKSENEL DAVRANIŞI Rashidi M. Aydın Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İnşaat Mühendislik Program, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Aydın, 2021. Amaç: Bu araştırma, tek yönlü keten elyaf (FFRP) ile tek başına veya cam elyaf (GFRP) ve karbon elyaf (CFRP) ile hibritlenmiş biçimde sargılama yapıldığında düşük dayanımlı betonun eksenel davranışını incelemek amacıyla yapılmıştır. Materyal ve Yöntem: Bu araştırmada, sargılama türü (tek malzemeyle veya hibrit) ve sargı sayısı çalışmanın ana parametreleridir. Elyaf malzemeler, beton silindir numunelere elle yatırma yöntemi kullanılarak ve epoksi reçineyle yapıştırılarak sarılmış ve bu yolla sargılama sağlanmıştır. Sargılanan beton numuneler monotonik eksenel basınç altında test edilmişlerdir. Bulgular: Bu çalışmada toplam 23 adet beton silindirik numune test edilmiştir. Sonuçlar, sadece keten elyaf ile sınırlandırılmış numuneler için bile beton numune mukavemetinin ve nihai birim deformasyon kapasitesinin önemli ölçüde arttığını göstermektedir. Hibrit sargılama sonucunda davranışta daha da yüksek bir iyileşme elde edilebilmiştir. Sonuç: Bu çalışmada, kullanılan keten elyaf malzemenin, sargı katman sayısına bağlı olarak düşük dayanımlı betonun eksenel mukavemetini ve sünekliğini önemli ölçüde artırabileceği sonucuna varılmıştır.TABLE OF CONTENTS ACCEPTANCE AND APPROVAL.........................................................................................iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................................v TABLE OF CONTENTS ..........................................................................................................vi LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS....................................................................viii LIST OF PICTURES..................................................................................................................x LIST OF FIGURES...................................................................................................................xi LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................................xiii ÖZET.......................................................................................................................................xiv ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................................xv 1.INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................1 1.1. General Information ............................................................................................................1 1.2. Purpose of Thesis ................................................................................................................3 2.LITERATURE REVIEW........................................................................................................4 2.1. General Information ............................................................................................................4 3.MATERIALS AND METHODS ............................................................................................8 3.1. General Introduction............................................................................................................8 3.2. Materials..............................................................................................................................8 3.2.1. Composite Materials.........................................................................................................8 3.2.2. UD-Flax 50.......................................................................................................................9 3.2.3. Concrete..........................................................................................................................10 3.2.4. Structural Repair Mortar.................................................................................................11 3.2.5. Epoxy Resin....................................................................................................................11 3.3. Method...............................................................................................................................12 3.3.1. Specimen Designation ....................................................................................................12 vii 3.3.2. Specimen Preparation.....................................................................................................13 3.3.3. Coupon Tests..................................................................................................................17 3.3.4. Compression Test Setup and Instrumentation................................................................17 4.RESULTS..............................................................................................................................20 4.1. Coupon Test Results..........................................................................................................20 4.2. Failure Modes of FRP Confined Specimens .....................................................................27 4.3. Axial Stress-Strain Response of the Specimens................................................................28 4.4. Effects of Applied Confinement on the Stress-Strain Curves...........................................34 5.COMPARISON WITH EXISTING MODELS.....................................................................36 5.1. General information...........................................................................................................36 5.2. Compressive Behavior of Confined and Unconfined Concrete ........................................36 5.2.1. Lam and Teng (2003) Model..........................................................................................38 5.2.2. Turkish Earthquake Code (TEC) - 2018 Model .............................................................39 5.2.3. Wu et al. (2008) Model...................................................................................................40 5.3. Comparison with the Existing Models ..............................................................................41 6.DISCUSSION........................................................................................................................47 7.CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................................................50 REFERENCES.........................................................................................................................52 SCIENTIFIC ETHICAL STATEMENT..................................................................................55 RESUME..................................................................................................................................5

The Impact of COVID-19 on Immigration Detention

COVID-19 has spread quickly through immigration detention facilities in the United States. As of December 2, 2020, there have been over 7,500 confirmed COVID-19 cases among detained noncitizens. This Article examines why COVID-19 spread rapidly in immigration detention facilities, how it has transformed detention and deportation proceedings, and what can be done to improve the situation for detained noncitizens. Part I identifies key factors that contributed to the rapid spread of COVID-19 in immigration detention. While these factors are not an exhaustive list, they highlight important weaknesses in the immigration detention system. Part II then examines how the pandemic changed the size of the population in detention, the length of detention, and the nature of removal proceedings. In Part III, the Article offers recommendations for mitigating the impact of COVID-19 on detained noncitizens. These recommendations include using more alternatives to detention, curtailing transfers between detention facilities, establishing a better tracking system for medically vulnerable detainees, prioritizing bond hearings and habeas petitions, and including immigration detainees among the groups to be offered COVID-19 vaccine in the initial phase of the vaccination program. The lessons learned from the spread of COVID-19 in immigration detention will hopefully lead to a better response to any future pandemics. In discussing these issues, the Article draws on national data from January 2019 through November 2020 published by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP), two agencies within DHS. The main datasets used are detention statistics published by ICE for FY 2019 (Oct. 2018-Sep. 2019), FY 2020 (Oct. 2019-Sep. 2020), and the first two months of FY 2021 (Oct. 2020-Nov. 2020). These datasets include detention statistics about individuals arrested by ICE in the interior of the country, as well as by CBP at or near the border. Additionally, the Article draws on separate data published by CBP regarding the total number of apprehensions at the border based on its immigration authority under Title 8 of the United States Code, as well as the number of expulsions at the border based on its public health authority under Title 42 of the United States Code