Recent orders

Domestic Relations DFG

Domestic Relations

Name of Student

Name of Institution

Question 1

Missouri v. Jenkins, 491 U.S.274, 109 S.Ct. 2463, 2471, n.10 (1989) established that tasks carried out by paralegals should be substantive (that is, can be performed in the absence of an attorney). For instance, you can determine the requirements for support and calculate the child support (The Law Cost Management Group, 2014).

Question 2

Guideline 5 of the Model Standards and Guidelines for Utilization of Paralegals permits paralegals to handle a wide range of cases including Child custody matters (Association of Legal Assistants, 2014).

Question 3

No limit is put to the questions you can ask the client during interview. However, some attorneys facilitate the interview through questionnaires, which you may fill hence saving time. You could ask Ms. Mercedes the following questions:

Are you really in a good position to take care of the children if granted custody?

Have you exhausted all possibilities of reconciliation with your husband?

What is your financial position?

Question 4

Ms. Mercedes’ may or may not be eligible. The rule is that the problem presented by the client must be covered by the legal aid policy of the institution. Moreover, the client’s income and assets must be below the institution’s financial guidelines for legal aid. Ms. Mercedes is eligible for legal aid because her income is below financial guidelines. Case: Re Marriage of Brown and Yana (2006) 37 Cal.4th 947.

Question 5

A proof of service is a legal document that must be attached to every paper filed with the court. A confirmation with the clerk’s office revealed that Ms. Mercedes’ husband served the proof of service on 27 September 2014. Ms. Mercedes was served by her husband’s workmate, Mr. Jeremy. Case: Gaetano Lovero v. Joelma Da Silva. No 1547 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2011)

Question 6

In Maryland, the rule is that the gross incomes of the father and the mother are combined, with certain allowable deductions such as paid local income tax, and any spousal or child support order for former spouses or other children. The court then works out the child support using the total number of children and the chartered amount of child support. Ms. Mercedes has a monthly income of $300 while her husband has a monthly income of $3500. Therefore, Ms. Mercedes will obtain 95% of the chartered amount. Case: Re Marriage of LeMusga (2004) 32 Cal.4th 1072

Question 7

Guideline 2 of the Model Standards and Guidelines for Utilization of Paralegals does not allow a paralegal to give legal advice or opinion. Therefore, you cannot advice Ms. Mercedes on the matter of her custody chances.

Question 8

A counterclaim is not possible because the duration of 10 days has elapsed. Moreover, Ms. Mercedes is not sure when she was served. Therefore, pleadings are the only way to go. It is a rule under civil procedure law that counterclaims cannot be filed after the lapse of 10 days.

Question 9

Guideline 1 of the Model Standards and Guidelines for Utilization of Paralegals requires paralegals to disclose to the client their status as legal assistants and that they work under attorney guidance. This should be the first thing before any relationship is established with the client.

References

The Association of Legal Assistants (2014). Model Standards and Guidelines for Utilization of

Paralegals. Retrieved 24 October 2014 from HYPERLINK “http://www.nala.org/model.aspx” http://www.nala.org/model.aspx

The Law Cost Management Group (2014). What Paralegals Do (and What Lawyers Shouldn’t

Do). Retrieved 24 October 2014 from HYPERLINK “http://www.lawcost.com/paras.htm” l “family” http://www.lawcost.com/paras.htm#family

Domestic Public Policy Challenge

Domestic Public Policy Challenge

Introduction

Issues pertaining to immigration have been extremely controversial in the recent times. In fact, different individuals have different opinions not only with regard to the impact or effects of illegal immigration, but also on the most appropriate and effective techniques in solving the issue. Underlining the importance of immigration as a policy challenge is the fact that I touches on numerous aspects of the economy. A report released by the economic team in the White House showed that immigrants provide a stable workforce in the agricultural sector. According to the report, the elimination of the immigrants’ workforce would result in the production-related losses of more than $3 billion up from $1.7 billion per year in California alone. On the same, the issue of immigration touches on the security of the United States. Janet Napolitano, the secretary of Department of Homeland Security told the Congress in 2012 that terrorists enter the United States through the Mexican border (Lyons 43) This should not be surprising especially considering that the revelation comes hot on the heels of a 2011 report that stated that the over 7500 individuals coming from countries that have considerable terrorist elements or countries seen as state terror sponsors were apprehended in the south-western border (Lyons 45). The countries of origin included Syria, Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, Somalia, Libya and Yemen. Security officials believe that the Somali Al-Shabaab terrorist group, which is associated with al-Qaeda, may have managed to smuggle close to a thousand individuals across the United States border.

Historical Background and Efforts in Addressing Illegal Immigration

Immigration has been part of the American fabric since time immemorial. Indeed, this is essentially the reason why the United States came to be known as “the melting pot”. However, the issue of illegal immigration can be traced to the late 19th century (Lyons 46). Scholars note that from 1881 to 1920, more than 23 million immigrants had poured into the United States. This prompted the Congress to pass the Quota Law, which resulted in the reduction of immigration to around 350,000 every year. Indeed, the number of immigrants by 1924 had reduced to 160,000. However, Mexicans were not restricted from entering the U.S as they provided cheap labor. Scholars note that the legal immigration resulted in today’s illegal immigration (Kenney 44).

One of the most fundamental policies made in an effort to limit illegal immigration was the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act, which gave amnesty to approximately 3 million illegal immigrants. The illegal immigrants who had been in the country for more than five would be granted temporary legal status and later be granted citizenship upon meeting certain conditions (Kenney 40). However, the number of illegal immigrants that were essentially given citizenship exceeded expectations due to fraud in the exercise. The amnesty was complemented by the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, which was still aimed at limiting the numbers further (Kenney 42). Unfortunately, the problem persisted through to the Bush administration. Currently, the number of illegal immigrants is touted to be between 12 and 20 million, which is an immense increase from the 7 million in the year 2000 (Kenney 45).

Underlying causes of illegal immigration

Scholars have noted that illegal immigration has been primarily caused by the limited channels that the immigration system provides for legal permanent migration, especially with regard to low-skilled workers. This has resulted in the trumping up of legal structures by economic incentives, thereby creating a large pool of illegal but low skilled immigrants. In addition, employer sanctions pertaining to illegal immigration have been extremely ineffective and ambiguous thereby making it easy for illegal immigrants to find work (Miller 33). These sanctions do not have sufficient mechanisms for verification of employment eligibility, funding for enforcement f interior immigration, or even political will as a result to the U.S economy’s labor needs. On the same note, there has been conflicting political will over the issue of illegal immigrants (Lyons 49). As much as the public is concerned about violations of U.S law and sovereignty, it, at the same time requires strong economic performance, which essentially hinders efforts of disrupting economic activities pertaining to illegal workers. This has resulted in overwhelming focus on the Mexican border, while few resources are channeled interior enforcement.

Policy Options for Combating Illegal Immigration

Efforts to combat the problem of illegal immigration must incorporate three ingredients.

First, it is imperative that effective workplace verification mechanisms are established. In this case, employers should have the tools, as well as legal responsibility to verify the eligibility of a prospective employee to work.

Second, there should be a relaxation of the legal avenues of getting into the country. While temporary worker programs may be good, they come with an entire set of problems such as social divisions and differentiation between citizens and workers (Miller 34). This underlines the necessity of increased permanent economic migration.

Lastly, resources must be extended beyond border control. In this case, adequate resources have to be channeled to the enforcement of immigration laws in the workplace. Real penalties must be imposed on employers who engage illegal immigrants.

Suggested solution

Combating the problem of illegal immigrants necessitates that a combination of strategies are used. This would not only involve closing the borders but also putting in place measures that would eliminate the incentives for illegal immigrants to come to the United States. Research shows that about 500,000 illegal immigrants get into the country yearly with those coming to look for greener pastures being more than 96% (Lyons 54). This is the result of laxity in enforcing immigration laws that have real penalties to employers. In this case, meting harsh penalties on such employers would make it difficult for illegal immigrants to obtain jobs, thereby eliminating the incentives to get to the United States illegally.

Works cited

Miller, Debra A. Illegal Immigration. San Diego, Calif: ReferencePoint Press, 2007. Print.

Kenney, Karen L. Illegal Immigration. Edina, Minn: ABDO Pub. Co, 2008. Print

Lyons, Charlton. Illegal Immigration: The Consequence of Misplaced Trust : a Layman’s Close, Hard Look at the Immigration Reform and Contol Act of 1986. Bloomington, Ind: Authorhouse, 2012. Print.

Domestic Policy

Author

Tutor

Course

Date

Domestic Policy

Introduction

Issues pertaining to governance have always drawn controversy form different quarters. This is especially with regard to what has come to be commonly referred to as separation of powers. Needless to say, the different branches of government were aimed at checking each others’ actions so as to ensure that they are constitutional and are not detrimental to the people. However, these powers are, more often than not, shared between the different branches of government. For instance, while the Congress has all the legislative powers vested on it in Article 1, Section 1, it is required to share the same with the executive (Davidson 257). Indeed, presidents have the capacity to shape the legislative agenda although they may not ensure that their recommendations become laws (Davison 257). Modern presidents have strived to dominate the executive branch agencies, not to mention the fact that they have the capacity to veto congressional enactments (Davidson 257). Indeed, they have the capacity to ignore laws if they deem it appropriate. While the three branches are blended and assigned special duties, the relationship is always a result of accommodation and compromise rather than isolation (Davidson 259). In the past, the legislature and the executive have kept their distance from each other. However, some presidents such as the two Roosevelt were active in legislature. George bush, on the other hand, indicated his desire to take the power denied of the executive by the legislature (Davidson 261). Nevertheless, their success is dependent on their capacity to build a rapport with the legislature, especially in instances where they control the Senate and the House. Irrespective of the popularity of the modern presidents, they are always faced with the prospects of decreasing public approval and hope in their leaderships (Davidson 270). In most cases, however, the Senate and the Congress will have different majorities. Such divided governments come with a high price with respect to policy stalemate (Davidson 273).

In most cases, presidents have to make deals and compromise with varied stakeholders so as to eliminate such stalemates. Such was the case for Obama prior to the signing of the health reform bill in 2010. As the movie “Obama’s deal” shows, the idealistic president pursued the fight for the healthcare reform bill and ended up cutting deals with a large number of the powerful special interests against which he had campaigned. As Tom Daschle, the former Senate Majority leader reveals, the passing of the bill involved the use of hundreds of millions of dollars in lobbying in an effort to gain support for the healthcare bill. Previous efforts to cut the deals had resulted in the sinking of the president’s approval ratings, and the loss of Ted Kennedy’s senate seat. It was not until another round of talks and round-the-clock deal making before the bill sailed through.

This is, undoubtedly, quite surprising especially considering that the president had not only indicated that the lobbyists and special interest groups would have to abide by a certain code of ethics and would not get a job in his White House (Tichenor 265). Modern presidents have incentives to keep away from organized interests, especially considering that ordinary citizens view the later with contempt and suspicion. However, neither of the two can disregard the other. Presidents may see the interest groups as sources of mobilized opposition, while interest groups must factor in the immense powers vested on the executive in policy formulation, agenda setting, policy implementation and budget making (Tichenor 267). As much as a large number of interest groups allied to presidents that have restricted leadership opportunities gain fewer tangible benefits that assumed, oppositional groups usually see adversarial politics popular in such presidencies as hospitable to effective and vibrant activism (Tichenor 291).

Works cited

Davidson, Roger. H. “Presidential Relations with Congress” James P. Pfiffner and Roger H. Davidson eds. Understanding the Presidency, Pearson, 2013.

Frontline coverage of the passage of the Affordable Health Care Act. HYPERLINK “http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/obamasdeal/view/utm_campaign=homepage” http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/obamasdeal/view/utm_campaign=homepage

Tichenor, Daniel. J. “The Presidency and Interest Groups: Allies, Adversaries, and Policy Leadership” in Michael Nelson, ed. The Presidency and the Political System, 9th eds. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press, 2010. 264-294.