Conditional Residence for Unauthorised Immigrant Parents

Responding to the Social Membership Claims of their Children

in The International Journal of Children's Rights
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?

Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.


Have Institutional Access?

Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?


In this article, I argue that states have a long-term public policy interest in applying the best interests of the child standard that they use for domestic child welfare determinations in immigration cases that involve deportable non-citizen parents. But I also recognise that the interests of existing citizens in effective immigration regulation and enforcement need to be taken into consideration. The burden lies with parents who entered and continued to reside without authorisation in a country to show that their right to remain is of benefit to existing citizens. This means that unauthorised immigrant parents should only be given conditional permission to stay in their children’s country of long-term residence to raise them. Otherwise deportable parents should not be immediately legalised outright. Rather, they should be held to account for discharging their duty to their children in the same manner as immigrants whose residence is conditional for other reasons.

Conditional Residence for Unauthorised Immigrant Parents

Responding to the Social Membership Claims of their Children

in The International Journal of Children's Rights



  • 8 c.f.r. §240.21(a)(1)Cancellation of RemovalFederal Immigration Laws and Regulations. (St. Paul, MN: West Publishing2011).

  • AbramsK.Immigration Status and the Best Interests of the Child Standard”Virginia Journal of Social Policy and the Law 2006 (14(1)) 87102.

  • AbramsK.Immigration Law and the Regulation of Marriage”Minnesota Law Review 2007 (91(6)) 16251709.

  • Acosta v. Gaffney 558 F.2d 1153 (u.s. 3rd Cir. 1977).

  • Adoption and Safe Families Act H.R. 867” 105th Congress 1st Session. 19 November 1997.

  • StatAlaska. § 47.05.065(4)–(5) (LexisNexis through 2007 1st Sess.).

  • AlbaR. and WatersM.C.The Next Generation: Immigrant Youth in a Comparative Perspective. (New York: NYU Press2011).

  • AlstonP. and Gilmour-WalshB.The Best Interests of the Child: Towards a Synthesis of Children’s Rights and Cultural Values (Florence, Italy: Unicef1996).

  • AppellA.B.Protecting Children or Punishing Mothers: Gender, Race and Class in the Child Protection SystemSouth Carolina Law Review 1997 (48(3)) 577613.

  • BaumJ.JonesR. and BarryC.In the Child’s Best Interest? The Consequences of Losing a Lawful Immigrant Parent to Deportation (Berkeley, CA: University of California, International Human Rights Clinic2010).

  • Bark v. Immigration and Naturalization Service 511 F.2d 1200 (u.s. 9th Cir. 1975).

  • BeanF.D. et al. “The Educational Legacy of Unauthorised Migration: Comparisons Across u.s. Immigrant Groups in How Parents’ Status Affects their Offspring”International Migration Review 2011 (45(2)) 348385.

  • BelliveauM.Gendered Matters: Undocumented Mexican Mothers in the Current Policy Context”Affilia 2011 (26(1)) 3246.

  • BhabhaJ.The Mere Fortuity of Birth: Are Children Citizens? Differences: A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies 2004 (15(2)) 91117.

  • BhabhaJ. (2009a) “Arendt’s Children: Do Today’s Children Have the Right to Have Rights”Human Rights Quarterly 2009a (31(2)) 410451.

  • BhabhaJ. (2009b) “The Mere Fortuity of Birth” in BenhabibS. and ResnikJ. eds. Migrations and Mobilities: Citizenship Borders and Gender. (New York: NYU Press2009): pp. 187227.

  • BlakeC.Citizenship, Law and the State: The British Nationality Act of 1981”Modern Law Review 1982 (45(2)) 179197.

  • BledsoeC. H. and SowP.. “Back to Africa: Second Chances for the Children of West African Immigrants”Journal of Marriage and the Family 2011 (73(4)) 747762.

  • BloemraadI. and de GraauwE.Immigrant Integration and Policy in the United States: A Loosely Stitched PatchworkWorking Paper Series Institute for Research on Labor and Employment uc Berkeley. 7 April 2011. Available Online: last accessed: 10 September 2013.

  • BoehmD.Here/Not Here: Contingent Citizenship and Transnational Mexican ChildrenCoeCatiReynoldsRachel R.BoehmDeborah A.Meredith HessJulia and Rae-EspinozaHeather eds. Everyday Ruptures: Children Youth and Migration in Global Perspective. (Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press2011): pp. 161173.

  • BrabeckK. and XuQ.The Impact of Detention and Deportation on Latino Immigrant Children and Families: A Quantitative Exploration”Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Studies 2010 (32(3)) 341361.

  • BreenC.The Standard of the Best Interests of the Child (The Hague: Brill | Nijhofff2002).

  • BrilmayerL. and StarrS.Family Separation as a Violation of International Law”Berkeley Journal of International Law 2003 (21) 213287.

  • CappsR. et al. Paying the Price: The Impact of Immigration Raids on America’s Children (Washington, DC: Urban Institute2007).

  • CarreónG.P.DrakeC. and BartonA.C.The Importance of Presence: Immigrant Parents' School Engagement Experiences”American Educational Research Journal 2005 (42(3)) 465498.

  • Changes to Citizenship by Birth in New Zealand 2006 faqsThe New Zealand Department of

  • AffairsInternal available online: last accessed: 10 September 2013.

  • ChaudryA. et al. Facing Our Future: Children in the Aftermath of Immigration Enforcement (Urban Institute: Washington, DC2010).

  • ChaudryA.Children in the Aftermath of Immigration Enforcement”Journal of the History of Children and Youth 2011 (4(1)) 137154.

  • DettlaffA.J.Latino Children of Immigrants in the Child Welfare System: Preliminary Findings From the National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-BeingThe Intersection of Immigration and Child Welfare: Emerging Issues and Implications (Conference ProceedingsChicago Ill. 13 April 2008).

  • Development, Relief and Education Act for Minors of 2011, S. 952” (United States Senate) 112th Congress 1st Session 11 May 2011.

  • EichnerM.The Supportive State. (New York: Oxford University Press2010).

  • ElsterJ.Solomonic Judgments: Against the Best Interests of the Child”University of Chicago Law Review 1987 (54(1)) 145.

  • FeereJ.Birthright Citizenship in the United States: A Global Comparison. (Washington, DC: Center for Immigration Studies2010).

  • FergusonA.Not Without My Daughter: Deportation and the Termination of Parental Rights”Georgetown Immigration Law Journal 2007 (22(1)) 85104.

  • GandaraP. and ContrerasF.The Latino Education Crisis: The Consequences of Failed Social Policies. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press2009).

  • GibsonM.A.HidalgoN.E.Bridges to Success in High School for Migrant YouthTeachers College Record. 2009 (111(3)) 683711.

  • GlenP.The Removability of Non-Citizen Parents and the Best Interests of Citizen ChildrenGeorgetown Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper 1121 (2011).

  • GoldsteinJ.SolnitA.J.GoldsteinS. and FreudA.. The Best Interests of the Child: The Least Detrimental Alternative (New York: The Free Press1996).

  • GuttinA.The Criminal Alien ProgramImmigration Policy Center Special Report (February 2010). Available Online: last accessed: 10 September 2013.

  • HallC. E.Where Are My Children … And My Rights? Parental Rights Termination as a Consequence of DeportationDuke Law Journal 2011 (60(6)) 14591503.

  • HansenR.Immigration and Immigration Reform in the United States: An Outsider’s View”The Forum 2009 (7(3)) 113.

  • Hernandez-TruyolB.Children and Immigration: International, Local and Social Responsibilities”Boston University Public Interest Law Journal 2006 (15) 297317.

  • Human Rights WatchA Costly Move: Far and Frequent Transfers Impede Hearings for Immigrant Detainees in the United States (Washington, DC: Human Rights Watch2011).

  • HonohanI.Bounded Citizenship and the Meaning of Citizenship Laws: Ireland’s Jus Soli Citizenship Referendum” in CardinalL. and BrownN. eds. Managing Diversity: Practices of Citizenship in Australia Canada and Ireland. (Ottawa, ON: University of Ottawa Press2007): pp. 6387.

  • HonohanI.Reconsidering the Claim to Family Reunification in Migration”Political Studies 2009 (57(4)) 768787.

  • Immigration Marriage Fraud Amendments of 1986 (imfa) Pub L. 99–639 100 Stat. 3537 10 November 1986.

  • Immigration Act of 1990” Pub L. 101–649 104 Stat. 4978 5085–5086 19 November 1990.

  • In re c-v-t- 22 I. & N. Dec. 7 (b.i.a. 1998).

  • In re Monreal-Aguinaga 23 I. & N. Dec. 56 (b.i.a. 2001).

  • IgnatiusS. and StickneyE.. Immigration Law and the Family: 2011 Edition. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing2011.

  • JastramK.Family Unity” in AleinikoffAlexander and ChetailVincent et al. eds. Migration and International Legal Norms (The Hague: T.M.C. Asser Press2003): 185201.

  • JohnsonE. I. and WaldfogelJ.Parental Incarceration: Effects on Child Welfare” in YarberAnnice and SharpPaul L. eds. Focus on Single Parent Families: Past and Future (abc-cilo: Santa Barbara ca2010): 8699.

  • JoppkeC.Citizenship and Immigration (London: Polity Press2010).

  • KellyJ.B.The Best Interests of the Child: A Concept in Search of Meaning”Family Court Review 1997 (35(4)) 377387.

  • KohmL.M.Tracing the Foundations of the Best Interests of the Child Standard in American Jurisprudence”Journal of Law and Family Studies 2008 (10) 337376.

  • KremerJ.D.MoccioK.A. and HammellJ.W.. Severing a Lifeline: The Neglect of Citizen-Children in America’s Enforcement Policy. (Washington, DC: Urban Institute2009).

  • LegomskyS.H.Rationing Family Values in Europe and America: An Immigration Tug of War Between States and their Supra-National AssociationsGeorgetown Immigration Law Journal 2011 (25(4)) 807858.

  • LopezD.Wither the Flock” in AlbaRichardRaboteauAlbert J. and DeWindJoshImmigration and Religion in America: Comparative and Historical Perspectives. (New York: NYU Press2009): pp. 7198.

  • LopezM.P.A Tale of Two Systems: Analyzing the Treatment of Noncitizen Families in State Family Law Systems and Under the Immigration Law System”Harvard Latino Law Review 2008 (11) 229246.

  • Martinez-CabreraA.Deported Woman Reunited With Citizen-ChildrenEl Paso Times 8 July 2011. Available online: last accessed: 10 September 2013.

  • Matter of Marin 16 I. & N. Dec. 581 (B.I.A. 1978).

  • McAdamJ.Seeking Asylum Under the Convention on the Rights of the Child: A Case for Complementary Protection”International Journal of Children’s Rights 2006 (14) 251275.

  • McClainL.The Place of Families (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press2006).

  • McCollumI. W. (Bill) Jr. “Comments on H.R. 3737, Immigration Marriage Fraud Amendments of 1986” 26 September 1986. Congressional Record. (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office1986) H27015-H27017.

  • McFarlandM. and SpanglerE.M.A Parent’s Undocumented Status Should Not Be Considered Under the Best Interests of the Child Standard”William Mitchell Law Review 2008 (35(1)) 247282.

  • MendelsonM.StromS. and WishnieM.Collateral Damage: An Examination of ice’s Fugitive Operations Program. (Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute2009).

  • Meyer v. Nebraska 262 u.s. 390 (1923).

  • MortonJ.Deportation of Parents of u.s.-Born Citizens Fiscal Year 2011 Report to Congress Second Semi-Annual Report ( US Immigration and Customs Enforcement: Washington, DC2012).

  • MullallyS.Citizenship and Family Life in Ireland: Asking the Question ‘Who Belongs’”Legal Studies 2005 (25) 578600.

  • NesselL.A.Families at Risk: How Errant Enforcement and Restrictionist Integration Policies Threaten the Immigrant Family in the United States and EuropeHofstra Law Review (36(4)) 12711302.

  • Oforji v. Ashcroft 354 F.3d 609 620–621 (u.s. 7th Cir. 2003).

  • OlivaresM.A Final Obstacle: Barriers to Divorce for Immigrant Victims of Domestic Violence”Hamline Law Review 2011 (34(2)) 149204.

  • Parham v. J. R. 442 u.s. 584 (1979).

  • PasselJ. and CohnD.. “Unauthorized Immigrant Population: National and State Trends 2010Pew Hispanic Center Reports. (Washington, DC: Pew Hispanic Center February 2011). Available online: last accessed 10 September 2013.

  • Pierce v. Society of Sisters 268 u.s. 510 (1925).

  • Plyler v. Doe 457 u.s. 202 (1982).

  • Prince v. Massachusetts 321 u.s. 158 (1944).

  • Quilloin v. Walcott 434 u.s. 246 (1978).

  • RabinN.Disappearing Parents: Immigration Enforcement and the Child Welfare SystemConnecticut Law Review 2011 (44(1)) 99160.

  • RubensteinK.Citizenship and the Centenary: Inclusion and Exclusion in 20th Century Australia”Melbourne University Law Review 2000 (24(3)) 576608.

  • RufferG.B.Pushed Beyond Recognition? The Liberality of Family Reunification Policies in the euJournal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 2011 (37(6)) 935951.

  • Santosky v. Kramer 455 u.s. 745 (1982).

  • SchuckP.H.The Morality of Immigration Policy”San Diego Law Review 2008 (45(4)) 865898.

  • SeminaraD.Hello, I Love You, Won’t You Tell Me Your Name: Inside the Green Card Marriage PhenomenonCenter for Immigration Studies Backgrounder (2008).

  • SherlockC.Gender, Family Unity and Migration: Discourses and Dilemmas” in StalfordHelenCurrieSamantha and VellutiSamantha eds. Gender and Migration in 21stCentury Europe (FarnhamUK: Ashgate Publishing2009): pp. 223240.

  • SkinnerR.L.Removals Involving Illegal Alien Parents of u.s. citizen-children. (Washington, DC: Office of the Inspector General2009).

  • Stanley v. Illinois 405 u.s. 645 (1972).

  • TangemanA.S.Endgame: Office of Detention and Removal Strategic Plan 2003–2012: Detention and Removal Strategy for a Secure Homeland (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Homeland Security2003).

  • TaylorP. et al. Unauthorized Immigrants: Length of Residency Patterns of Parenthood (Washington, DC: Pew Hispanic Center2011).

  • ThompsonG.After Losing Freedom, Some Immigrants Face Loss of Custody of Their ChildrenThe New York Times 22 April 2009. Available online: last accessed: 10 September 2013.

  • ThronsonD.Choiceless Choices: Deportation and the Parent-Child Relationship”Nevada Law Journal 2006 (6(3)) 11651214.

  • ThronsonD. (2008a) “Creating Crisis: Immigration Raids and the Destabilization of Immigrant Families”Wake Forest Law Review 2008a (43(2)) 391418.

  • ThronsonD. (2008b) “Custody and Contradictions: Exploring Immigration Law as Federal Family Law in the Context of Child CustodyHastings Law Journal 2008 (59(3)) 453514.

  • ThronsonD.Clashing Values and Cross Purposes: Immigration Law’s Marginalization of Children and Families” in BhabhaJacqueline ed. Children Without a State (CambridgeMA: MIT Press2011): pp. 238254.

  • ThronsonD. and SullivanF.P.Family Courts and Immigration Status”Juvenile and Family Court Journal 2012 (63(1)) 118.

  • Troxel v. Granville 530 u.s. 57 (2000).

  • United States Citizenship and Immigration ServiceFraud Referral Sheet (Washington, DC: Department of Homeland Security2010). Available online: last accessed 10 September 2013.

  • United States Citizenship and Immigration ServiceInstructions for I–751 Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence (Washington, DC: Department of Homeland Security2013). Available online: last accessed 10 September 2013.

  • u.s. Department of Health and Human ServicesDetermining the Best Interests of the Child: Summary of State Laws (Washington, DC: Child Welfare Information Gateway2008).

  • u.s. State DepartmentVisa Bulletin for October 2013” Vol. 9 Number 61.” Available online: last accessed 10 September 2013.

  • VelazquezS.C. and DettlaffA.J.Immigrant Children and Child Welfare in the United States: Demographics, Legislation, Research, Policy, and Practice Impacting Public Services”Child Indicators Research 2011 (4(4)) 679695.

  • Violence Against Women Actu.s. Pub. L. 103–322 108 Stat. 1796 1902–1955 (1994).

  • Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Actu.s. Pub. L. No. 109–162 (2005).

  • WalzerM.Spheres of Justice. (New York: Basic Books1983).

  • WarburtonW. et al. “The Impact of Placing Adolescent Males into Foster Care on their Education, Income Assistance and Incarcerationiza Discussion Paper 5429 (January 2011). Available online: last accessed 10 September 2013.

  • WarnerR. S.The Role of Religion in the Process of Segmented Assimilation”Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 2007 (612) 100115.

  • Washington v. Glucksberg 521 u.s. 702 (1997).

  • Wisconsin v. Yoder 406 u.s. 205 (1972).

  • YoshikawaH.Immigrants Raising Citizens: Undocumented Parents and their Young Children. (New York: Russell Sage Foundation2011).

  • 10

    (Mendelson Strom and Wishnie 2009: 3). ice routinely distinguishes between highest-risk national security threats medium risk criminal aliens and low risk “ordinary status violators” in the implementation of its enforcement mandate.

Index Card

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 29 29 0
Full Text Views 209 209 1
PDF Downloads 4 4 0
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0