Essay

Noncitizens, Mental Health, and Immigration Adjudication

When a noncitizen commits a crime in the United States, they become vulnerable to the possibility of the government instigating removal proceedings against them. According to the Immigration and Nationality Act, the noncitizen can argue in their defense that the crime they committed was not particularly serious. In this “particularly serious crime” determination, immigration judges are allowed to consider a variety of factors to determine the danger of the noncitizen to the community of the United States. However, prior to May of 2022, immigration judges were categorically barred from considering mental health evidence in their analysis. In Matter of B-Z-R-, this changed. The new ruling by Attorney General Merrick Garland presents itself as a potential sea change in the consideration of mental health in immigration adjudications, ridding the complete bar on mental health evidence in deportation relief proceedings. This Essay argues, however, that the full effects of the ruling will only be realized if more guidance and resources are provided to immigration judges. The Board of Immigration Appeals should set clear guidelines pertaining to the consideration of mental health evidence, and the Executive Office for Immigration Review should provide funding for forensic mental health evaluations and psychiatric support in removal proceedings. The three proposed guidelines in this Essay will ensure that the mental health of noncitizens is being adequately and fairly considered by judges when respondents are seeking relief from deportation.

Introduction

Refugees are at a higher risk of developing mental health symptoms or already having undiagnosed mental health disorders. The American Psychological Association has pointed to factors—like migration-related stress, trauma suffered in their countries of origin, language barriers, fear of deportation and family separation, rising detention rates, barriers to healthcare access, financial instability, and a lack of work opportunities and education—that make it more likely for immigrants to suffer from a mental illness.1 1.See Virginia Barber-Rioja & Alexandra Garcia-Mansilla, Special Considerations When Conducting Forensic Psychological Evaluations for Immigration Court, 75 J. Clinical Psych. 2049, 2051 (2019) (canvassing the various circumstances resulting in greater mental health risks for immigrants).Show More These factors are linked to post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, anxiety, and emotional distress for migrants.2 2.See Irina Verhülsdonk, Mona Shahab & Marc Molendijk, Prevalence of Psychiatric Disorders Among Refugees and Migrants in Immigration Detention: Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis, 7 BJPsych Open 1, 1, 5 (2021) (reporting that among adult migrants, prevalence rates were 68% for depression, 54% for anxiety, and 42% for post-traumatic stress disorder).Show More The immigration system in our country addresses some of these factors while noncitizens are pushed through the system, such as providing procedural safeguards when respondents are deemed incompetent or providing mental health services while a noncitizen is in detention.3 3.See Matter of M-J-K-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 773, 773 (B.I.A. 2016); ICE Health Service Corps, U.S. Immigr. & Customs Enf’t (June 9, 2023), https://www.ice.gov/detain/ice-health-service-corps [https://perma.cc/2SJ3-MLJB].Show More But should the immigration courts be considering these factors when deciding whether to deport noncitizens with mental health disorders that arise from prior to the immigration process?

On May 9, 2022, Attorney General Merrick Garland decided “yes” in the context of a noncitizen having committed a crime leading to their deportation, resulting in the overruling of Matter of G-G-S-.4 4.Matter of B-Z-R-, 28 I. & N. Dec. 563, 563, 567 (A.G. 2022) (overruling the Board of Immigration Appeals’ holding in Matter of G-G-S-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 339 (B.I.A. 2014), that adjudicators may not consider the mental health of a respondent in determining whether a respondent was convicted of a particularly serious crime).Show More Immigration judges may now consider a respondent’s mental health in determining whether an individual, “having been convicted by a final judgment of a particularly serious crime, constitutes a danger to the community of the United States.”5 5.Id. at 563 (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(2)(A)(ii)).Show More If so, withholding of removal relief will be denied, and the respondent will be removed to their country of origin.6 6.8 U.S.C. § 1158(c)(2)–(3).Show More

This Essay argues that the new ruling by the Attorney General in Matter of B-Z-R- has presented itself as a potential sea change in the consideration of mental health in immigration adjudications, but the full effects of the ruling will only be realized if clear operative guidelines and resources are provided to immigration judges. For noncitizens seeking deportation relief, this decision presents a pivotal opportunity to explain why their past criminal conduct does not make them a danger to the community of the United States at present. For immigration judges, this decision provides just another factor of many that can be considered in the deportation determination. However, with a backlog of cases,7 7.Holly Straut-Eppsteiner, Cong. Rsch. Serv., R47077, U.S. Immigration Courts and the Pending Cases Backlog 1, 31 (2022) (noting that at the end of the first quarter of fiscal year (“FY”) 2022, the backlog reached an all-time high of 1.5 million cases, with 578 immigration judges on staff to adjudicate them).Show More a lack of expertise about mental health,8 8.See Amelia Wilson, Franco I Loved: Reconciling the Two Halves of the Nation’s Only Government-Funded Public Defender Program for Immigrants, 97 Wash. L. Rev. Online 21, 48–49 (2022) (discussing challenges in training immigration judges to evaluate mental health concerns).Show More and an insufficient amount of resources and guidance to aid in their determination,9 9.See id. at 50 (discussing shortfalls in funding and immigration judge training).Show More it is unlikely immigration judges will be motivated to adequately and fairly consider the noncitizen’s mental health at the time of the crime.

Noncitizens with mental illnesses are left vulnerable when navigating the immigration court system given the stigmatization and lack of understanding by those without expertise in mental health.10 10.Ayala Danzig & Marina Nakic, Appellate Court Clarifies That Immigration Judges Cannot Disregard Mental Health Professional Guidelines, 50 J. Am. Acad. Psychiatry & L. 158, 161 (2022).Show More To better ensure the consideration of mental health in the particularly serious crime analysis, the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) should set clear operative guidelines pertaining to the consideration of mental health evidence, and the Executive Office for Immigration Review should provide funding for forensic mental health evaluations and psychiatric support in removal proceedings.

Part I explains the “particularly serious crime” analysis in Section 241(b)(3) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. Part II discusses current issues that plague immigration adjudication when it comes to the consideration of mental health. Part III outlines three concrete guidelines the Board of Immigration Appeals should provide for immigration judges considering mental health in the particularly serious crime determination.

  1.  See Virginia Barber-Rioja & Alexandra Garcia-Mansilla, Special Considerations When Conducting Forensic Psychological Evaluations for Immigration Court, 75 J. Clinical Psych. 2049, 2051 (2019) (canvassing the various circumstances resulting in greater mental health risks for immigrants). ↑
  2.  See Irina Verhülsdonk, Mona Shahab & Marc Molendijk, Prevalence of Psychiatric Disorders Among Refugees and Migrants in Immigration Detention: Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis, 7 BJPsych Open 1, 1, 5 (2021) (reporting that among adult migrants, prevalence rates were 68% for depression, 54% for anxiety, and 42% for post-traumatic stress disorder). ↑
  3.  See Matter of M-J-K-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 773, 773 (B.I.A. 2016); ICE Health Service Corps, U.S. Immigr. & Customs Enf’t (June 9, 2023), https://www.ice.gov/detain/ice-health-service-corps [https://perma.cc/2SJ3-MLJB]. ↑
  4.  Matter of B-Z-R–, 28 I. & N. Dec. 563, 563, 567 (A.G. 2022) (overruling the Board of Immigration Appeals’ holding in Matter of G-G-S-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 339 (B.I.A. 2014), that adjudicators may not consider the mental health of a respondent in determining whether a respondent was convicted of a particularly serious crime). ↑
  5.  Id. at 563 (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(2)(A)(ii)). ↑
  6.  8 U.S.C. § 1158(c)(2)–(3). ↑
  7.  Holly Straut-Eppsteiner, Cong. Rsch. Serv., R47077, U.S. Immigration Courts and the Pending Cases Backlog 1, 31 (2022) (noting that at the end of the first quarter of fiscal year (“FY”) 2022, the backlog reached an all-time high of 1.5 million cases, with 578 immigration judges on staff to adjudicate them). ↑
  8.  See Amelia Wilson, Franco I Loved: Reconciling the Two Halves of the Nation’s Only Government-Funded Public Defender Program for Immigrants, 97 Wash. L. Rev. Online 21, 48–49 (2022) (discussing challenges in training immigration judges to evaluate mental health concerns). ↑
  9.  See id. at 50 (discussing shortfalls in funding and immigration judge training). ↑

  10.  Ayala Danzig & Marina Nakic, Appellate Court Clarifies That Immigration Judges Cannot Disregard Mental Health Professional Guidelines, 50 J. Am. Acad. Psychiatry & L. 158, 161 (2022). ↑

Catalyzing Judicial Federalism

Introduction

In response to a U.S. Supreme Court that is retrenching many important civil rights, some advocates are turning to state courts and constitutions as alternative means of protection.1 1.See, e.g., Riley Brennan, ACLU Staffs Up for New Initiative: ‘State Supreme Courts Are More Important Now Than Ever,’ ALM Law.com (May 2, 2023, 11:29 AM), https://www.law.com/2023/05/02/aclu-staffs-up-for-new-initiative-state-supreme-courts-are-more-important-now-than-ever [https://perma.cc/MN9H-9YRP]; Amy Myrick & Tamar Eisen, Building Protections for Reproductive Autonomy in State Constitutions, Ms. Mag. (May 24, 2022), https://msmagazine.com/2022/05/24/state-constitution-courts-abortion-rights/ [https://perma.cc/CJ8A-A5Q9] (“A more expansive vision for reproductive autonomy is necessary—and state courts can lead the way.”).Show More The Court’s regression follows a recent ideological change, a jurisprudential turn towards originalism and a long-standing normalization of judicial supremacy.2 2.See, e.g., David Cole, Egregiously Wrong: The Supreme Court’s Unprecedented Turn, N.Y. Rev. Books (Aug. 18, 2022), https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2022/08/18/egregious‌ly-wrong-the-supreme-courts-unprecedented-turn-david-cole/ [https://perma.cc/2CMZ-KV‌4F]; Mark A. Lemley, The Imperial Supreme Court, 136 Harv. L. Rev. F. 97, 110–11 (2022); Noah Feldman, Opinion, Supreme Court ‘Originalists’ Are Flying a False Flag, Bloomberg (July 17, 2022, 7:00 AM), https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2022-07-17/supre‌me-court-s-conservative-originalists-are-flying-a-false-flag#xj4y7vzkg [https://perma.cc/FZM8-G2FG] (arguing that the Court relies on selective originalism to “rationalize its activism”).Show More For some, transplanting legal strategies from federal to state courts risks bringing this old soil with it.3 3.See, e.g., Christopher Jon Sprigman, Congress’s Article III Power and The Process of Constitutional Change, 95 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 1778, 1833 (2020) (observing that arguments in favor of placing “a lot of faith in state courts” as an alternative to federal courts “are especially weak” and recreate judicial supremacy); Joseph Fishkin, Courts and Constitutional Political Economy, LPE Project (July 24, 2021), https://lpeproject.org/blog/courts-and-constitutional-political-economy/ [https://perma.cc/M6AN-8VZF] (arguing that “[w]e need the courts, but we also need to understand that the courts are not our friends—and are unlikely ever to be,” and cautioning against placing our hopes in them); Zachary Clopton, Commentary, Judges Will Not Save Us. Pushing for Truly Democratic Solutions Will, Chi. Trib. (Aug. 24, 2022, 1:37 PM), https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-opinion-state-courts-constitution-rights-judicial-supremacy-20220824-ig2eravofbb5rgh3k4ckzdw52a-story.html [https://perma.cc/ZKD9-EFJR] (suggesting excessive reliance on state courts “feeds into the notion of judicial supremacy that created these problems in the first place”).Show More That is, a pivot to the states risks perpetuating these pathologies and recreating at the state level the same regressive norms and jurisprudence that precipitated the turn in federal courts in the first place.

In this brief Essay, I explore two aspects of this view. First, there are good reasons to believe originalism will not achieve the traction among state supreme courts that it currently enjoys at the U.S. Supreme Court. Briefly stated, several of the theory’s bugs and features likely disincentivize its adoption by most state supreme courts. Second, the renewed interest in state courts provides advocates with an opportunity to protect their clients and advance their causes in ways that do not necessarily require the aggressive forms of judicial review that seem characteristic of federal constitutional culture. State-level institutions offer means to protect important rights and liberties that widen the lens beyond a myopic focus on constitutional litigation. In this Essay, I briefly highlight three of these pathways: direct democracy, state courts’ non-adjudicative powers, and the common law. To be sure, expansive constitutional protection via judicial interpretation may be necessary for certain rights in certain contexts. But for advocates turning to state-level institutions, that should not necessarily be the default rule. Rather, a meaningful turn to the states should draw on the broader constellation of tools for protecting rights available at the state level that may be more effective and flexible than the predominant federal approach.

  1.  See, e.g., Riley Brennan, ACLU Staffs Up for New Initiative: ‘State Supreme Courts Are More Important Now Than Ever,’ ALM Law.com (May 2, 2023, 11:29 AM), https://www.law.com/2023/05/02/aclu-staffs-up-for-new-initiative-state-supreme-courts-are-more-important-now-than-ever [https://perma.cc/MN9H-9YRP]; Amy Myrick & Tamar Eisen, Building Protections for Reproductive Autonomy in State Constitutions, Ms. Mag
    .

    (May 24, 2022), https://msmagazine.com/2022/05/24/state-constitution-courts-abortion-rights/ [https://perma.cc/CJ8A-A5Q9] (“A more expansive vision for reproductive autonomy is necessary—and state courts can lead the way.”). ↑

  2.  See, e.g., David Cole, Egregiously Wrong: The Supreme Court’s Unprecedented Turn, N.Y. Rev. Books (Aug. 18, 2022), https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2022/08/18/egregious‌ly-wrong-the-supreme-courts-unprecedented-turn-david-cole/ [https://perma.cc/2CMZ-KV‌4F]; Mark A. Lemley, The Imperial Supreme Court, 136 Harv. L. Rev. F
    .

    97, 110–11 (2022); Noah Feldman, Opinion, Supreme Court ‘Originalists’ Are Flying a False Flag, Bloomberg (July 17, 2022, 7:00 AM), https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2022-07-17/supre‌me-court-s-conservative-originalists-are-flying-a-false-flag#xj4y7vzkg [https://perma.cc/FZM8-G2FG] (arguing that the Court relies on selective originalism to “rationalize its activism”). ↑

  3.  See, e.g., Christopher Jon Sprigman, Congress’s Article III Power and The Process of Constitutional Change, 95 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 1778, 1833 (2020) (observing that arguments in favor of placing “a lot of faith in state courts” as an alternative to federal courts “are especially weak” and recreate judicial supremacy); Joseph Fishkin, Courts and Constitutional Political Economy, LPE Project (July 24, 2021), https://lpeproject.org/blog/courts-and-constitutional-political-economy/ [https://perma.cc/M6AN-8VZF] (arguing that “[w]e need the courts, but we also need to understand that the courts are not our friends—and are unlikely ever to be,” and cautioning against placing our hopes in them); Zachary Clopton, Commentary, Judges Will Not Save Us. Pushing for Truly Democratic Solutions Will, Chi. Trib. (Aug. 24, 2022, 1:37 PM), https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-opinion-state-courts-constitution-rights-judicial-supremacy-20220824-ig2eravofbb5rgh3k4ckzdw52a-story.html [https://perma.cc/ZKD9-EFJR] (suggesting excessive reliance on state courts “feeds into the notion of judicial supremacy that created these problems in the first place”). ↑

Chronic Nuisance Ordinances, Impossible Choices, and State Constitutions

Introduction

When Lakisha Briggs’s partner attacked her in April 2012, her daughter called the police.1 1.Lakisha Briggs, I Was a Domestic Violence Victim. My Town Wanted Me Evicted for Calling 911, Guardian (Sept. 11, 2015, 6:45 PM), https://www.theguardian.com/‌commentisfree/2015/sep/11/domestic-violence-victim-town-wanted-me-evicted-calling-911 [https://perma.cc/7NR4-Z269]; Verified First Amended Complaint at 10, Briggs v. Borough of Norristown, No. 2:13-cv-02191 (E.D. Pa. Apr. 29, 2013). Because Ms. Briggs’s story was well-publicized compared to most evictions resulting from chronic nuisance ordinance (“CNO”) enforcement, other scholarly pieces about chronic nuisance ordinances have also highlighted her endeavor. See, e.g., Salim Katach, Note, A Tenant’s Procedural Due Process Right in Chronic Nuisance Ordinance Jurisdictions, 43 Hofstra L. Rev. 875, 875–78 (2015).Show More Their response ensured that neither Ms. Briggs nor her daughter would ever take that risk again. Once officers arrived at Ms. Briggs’s home, they told her that, even as a victim of domestic violence, she was “on three strikes,” and they were “gonna have [her] landlord evict [her].”2 2.Briggs, supra note 1 (internal quotation marks omitted).Show More Unfortunately, Ms. Briggs lived in Norristown, Pennsylvania, one of hundreds of municipalities across the country with a chronic nuisance ordinance (“CNO”) in effect.3 3.Norristown, Pa., Mun. Code § 245-3 (2012). Norristown repealed this law as part of Briggs’s settlement, but its text remains available in Briggs’s complaint. Verified First Amended Complaint, supra note 1, at 1–2.Show More

Under a CNO, a local government can deem a property a “nuisance” when a certain number of police visits—responding to everything from marijuana use to domestic violence calls—occur at the property.4 4.SeeScout Katovich, NYCLU & ACLU, More Thana Nuisance: The Outsized Consequences of New York’s Nuisance Ordinances 6 (2018) [hereinafter More Than a Nuisance], https://www.nyclu.org/sites/default/files/field_documents/nyclu_nuisancereport_‌20180809.pdf [https://perma.cc/QPG3-L6P2] (explaining how CNOs operate in New York); see also Emily Werth, Sargent Shriver Nat’l Ctr. on Poverty L., The Cost of Being “Crime Free”: Legal and Practical Consequences of Crime Free Rental Housing and Nuisance Property Ordinances 2, 4, 8 (2013) (examining CNOs and other similar crime-free housing provisions in Illinois).Show More If the landlord fails to “abate the nuisance,” often an implicit command to evict the tenant, the locality retains broad discretion to impose heavy fines upon the landlord, revoke their rental license, close the property temporarily, or even seize it.5 5.More Than a Nuisance, supra note 4, at 6, 8; Matthew Desmond & Nicol Valdez, Unpolicing the Urban Poor: Consequences of Third-Party Policing for Inner-City Women, 78 Am. Socio. Rev. 117, 118–20 (2012) (identifying potential punishments).Show More With the threat of eviction looming over her and her children, Ms. Briggs was forced to suffer in silence.

Ms. Briggs’s troubles reached a new height two months later, when that same ex-partner stabbed her in the neck.6 6.Verified First Amended Complaint, supra note 1, at 15.Show More Despite her pleas not to call 9-1-1, concerned neighbors did so, and she was airlifted to the hospital.7 7.Erik Eckholm, Victims’ Dilemma: 911 Calls Can Bring Eviction, N.Y. Times (Aug. 16, 2013), https://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/17/us/victims-dilemma-911-calls-can-bring-evict‌ion.html [https://perma.cc/QUX7-ZWYG].Show More Her fears were well-founded. When she returned home, her landlord informed her that she had to leave within 14 days: the town’s restrictive nuisance ordinance “gave him no choice but to file a case against [her].”8 8.Briggs, supra note 1.Show More The town had revoked his license three days after Ms. Briggs was hospitalized.9 9.Verified First Amended Complaint, supra note 1, at 16.Show More Even though she subsequently succeeded in eviction court, the city insisted that Ms. Briggs leave.10 10.Briggs, supra note 1.Show More The Norristown ordinance “gave the city the power to condemn the property if [the landlord] did not remove me,” she explained.11 11.Id.Show More

Fortunately, the American Civil Liberties Union (“ACLU”) soon took up Ms. Briggs’s case.12 12.Verified First Amended Complaint, supra note 1, at 38.Show More She reached a settlement with the city that included repealing the CNO.13 13.Briggs, supra note 1; see also Press Release, ACLU, Norristown Will Pay $495,000 to Settle Case on Behalf of Woman Threatened with Eviction for Calling Police (Sept. 8, 2014), https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/pennsylvania-city-agrees-repeal-law-jeopardizes-safety-domestic-violence-survivors [https://perma.cc/GB3P-EV7Y] (stating that Norristown voted to repeal the ordinance as part of the Briggs settlement).Show More Pennsylvania then passed a law prohibiting municipalities from punishing victims for calling emergency services.14 14.53 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 304 (2014).Show More

Although Ms. Briggs and the ACLU succeeded in repealing this CNO, hundreds like it remain in effect throughout the United States—from its largest cities to its smallest towns.15 15.See, e.g., Cincinnati, Ohio, Mun. Code § 761-1-C–N (2013); Sumner, Wash., Mun. Code ch. 9.50 (2022). Over one hundred municipalities in Illinois have enacted CNOs and other harmful types of crime-free ordinances. Werth, supra note 4, at 26–28 app. A. A non-exhaustive study of Ohio CNOs and other crime-free ordinances revealed that at least forty municipalities have enacted them. Joseph Mead et al., Cleveland State Univ., Who Is a Nuisance? Criminal Activity Nuisance Ordinances in Ohio 19–20 app. A (2017). An investigation into New York CNOs revealed that twenty-five of the forty most populated municipalities outside of New York City have enacted them. More Than a Nuisance, supra note 4, at 10.Show More This Essay explores how CNOs harm marginalized groups and how local communities can stop that harm. Part I explains how CNOs typically operate and where they come from. Part II illustrates how CNOs can detrimentally impact communities of color, domestic violence victims, and people with physical and mental disabilities or illnesses. Finally, Part III examines how legal challenges and state-level reform can mitigate the harms of CNOs. This Essay intervenes in the scholarly discussion by arguing that state constitutional amendments—an undervalued instrument of reform—can limit harmful exercises of local power, invalidate CNOs, and strengthen individual rights. To that end, the Essay proposes model language for these amendments.

  1.  Lakisha Briggs, I Was a Domestic Violence Victim. My Town Wanted Me Evicted for Calling 911, Guardian (Sept. 11, 2015, 6:45 PM), https://www.theguardian.com/‌commentisfree/2015/sep/11/domestic-violence-victim-town-wanted-me-evicted-calling-911 [https://perma.cc/7NR4-Z269]; Verified First Amended Complaint at 10, Briggs v. Borough of Norristown, No. 2:13-cv-02191 (E.D. Pa. Apr. 29, 2013). Because Ms. Briggs’s story was well-publicized compared to most evictions resulting from chronic nuisance ordinance (“CNO”) enforcement, other scholarly pieces about chronic nuisance ordinances have also highlighted her endeavor. See, e.g., Salim Katach, Note, A Tenant’s Procedural Due Process Right in Chronic Nuisance Ordinance Jurisdictions,
    43 H

    ofstra

    L. R

    ev

    .

    875, 875–78 (2015). ↑

  2.  Briggs, supra note 1 (internal quotation marks omitted). ↑
  3. N

    orristown

    , P

    a

    ., M

    un

    . C

    ode § 245-3 (2012). Norristown repealed this law as part of Briggs’s settlement, but its text remains available in Briggs’s complaint. Verified First Amended Complaint, supra note 1, at 1–2. ↑

  4.  See Scout Katovich,
    NYCLU & ACLU, M

    ore

    T

    han

    a Nuisance: The Outsized Consequences of New York’s Nuisance Ordinances 6 (2018) [hereinafter More Than a Nuisance], https://www.nyclu.org/sites/default/files/field_documents/nyclu_nuisancereport_‌20180809.pdf [https://perma.cc/QPG3-L6P2] (explaining how CNOs operate in New York); see also Emily Werth, Sargent Shriver Nat’l Ctr. on Poverty L., The Cost of Being “Crime Free”: Legal and Practical Consequences of Crime Free Rental Housing and Nuisance Property Ordinances 2, 4, 8 (2013) (examining CNOs and other similar crime-free housing provisions in Illinois). ↑

  5.  More Than a Nuisance, supra note 4, at 6, 8; Matthew Desmond & Nicol Valdez, Unpolicing the Urban Poor: Consequences of Third-Party Policing for Inner-City Women, 78 Am. Socio. Rev. 117, 118–20 (2012) (identifying potential punishments). ↑
  6.  Verified First Amended Complaint, supra note 1, at 15. ↑
  7.  Erik Eckholm, Victims’ Dilemma: 911 Calls Can Bring Eviction, N.Y. Times (Aug. 16, 2013), https://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/17/us/victims-dilemma-911-calls-can-bring-evict‌ion.html [https://perma.cc/QUX7-ZWYG]. ↑
  8.  Briggs, supra note 1. ↑
  9.  Verified First Amended Complaint, supra note 1, at 16. ↑
  10.  Briggs, supra note 1. ↑
  11.  Id. ↑
  12.  Verified First Amended Complaint, supra note 1, at 38. ↑
  13.  Briggs, supra note 1; see also Press Release, ACLU, Norristown Will Pay $495,000 to Settle Case on Behalf of Woman Threatened with Eviction for Calling Police (Sept. 8, 2014), https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/pennsylvania-city-agrees-repeal-law-jeopardizes-safety-domestic-violence-survivors [https://perma.cc/GB3P-EV7Y] (stating that Norristown voted to repeal the ordinance as part of the Briggs settlement). ↑
  14.  53 Pa. Cons. Stat.
    § 304 (2014).

    ↑

  15.  See, e.g., Cincinnati, Ohio, Mun. Code § 761-1-C–N (2013); Sumner, Wash., Mun. Code ch. 9.50 (2022). Over one hundred municipalities in Illinois have enacted CNOs and other harmful types of crime-free ordinances. Werth, supra note 4, at 26–28 app. A. A non-exhaustive study of Ohio CNOs and other crime-free ordinances revealed that at least forty municipalities have enacted them. Joseph Mead et al., Cleveland State Univ., Who Is a Nuisance? Criminal Activity Nuisance Ordinances in Ohio 19–20 app. A (2017). An investigation into New York CNOs revealed that twenty-five of the forty most populated municipalities outside of New York City have enacted them. More Than a Nuisance, supra note 4, at 10. ↑

©Virginia Law Review Association. All rights reserved.