Washington Law Review


Robert Pauw


Many such pattern and practice cases have been filed :in the past, and we can expect that such cases will continue to arise in the future. At this point, it is unsettled whether and under what circumstances district courts have jurisdiction to hear pattern and practice cases. In this article, I consider the case law that has developed in the context of the legalization program. In part I, I describe the legalization program established by Congress and explain the unlawful manner in which the program was implemented by the Immigration Service, adversely affecting hundreds of thousands of applicants. In part II, I argue that these unlawful policies are best addressed in pattern and practice lawsuits in the district courts rather than in individual case-by-case review. Finally, in part III, I describe the case law that has limited the district courts' jurisdiction to hear such pattern and practice cases, arguing that the cases have not gone far enough in recognizing the benefits of pattern and practice lawsuits.

First Page