Download or read book Brief of “Amicus Curiae” the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights in Support of Respondents in the Supreme Court of the United States: Gene McNary, Commissioner, Immigration and Naturalization Service, “et Al.”, Petitioners, V. Haitian Centers Council, Inc., “et Al.”, Respondents written by Lawyers Committee for Human Rights and published by . This book was released on 1992 with total page 30 pages. Available in PDF, EPUB and Kindle. Book excerpt: This brief of “Amicus Curiae” the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights offered in support of respondents Haitian Centers Council, addresses the sole question whether Article 33 of the 1951 Convention is self-executing. The brief explains how the respondents sought to enjoin the enforcement of the US presidential order of 24 May 1992 which instructs the Coast Guard to interdict vessels on the high seas suspected of containing Haitians destined for US shores and to return such persons directly to Haiti. The brief notes that the issue whether Article 33 is self-executing arises only if the Court holds that the statutes respondents relied on do not apply to refugees on the high seas, but that Article 33 does apply to such refugees. “Amicus” indicate that they therefore examine the self-execution issue in this brief on those assumptions. The brief argues that by virtue of the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution, Article 33 became the supreme law of the land upon ratification, that Article 33 does not require implementing legislation, and thus, the non-refoulement obligation established by Article 33 has the force of domestic law in the US. The brief asserts that the plain text of Article 33, the Supreme Court's decisons in INS “v.” Cardoza Fonseca and INS “v.” Stevic, and the statements of executive branch officials when the 1967 Protocol was transmitted to the Senate make it clear that the obligation established by the Protocol is not an obligation to pass legislation, but an obligation not to return refugees to their persecutors. “Amicus” also argue that Article 33 establishes the obligation of judicial enforcement and that Article 33 need not confer a private right of action for injunctive relief since the Administrative Procedure Act confers respondents' right of action. The brief concludes with a request to the Court to affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit which held that the statutes respondents relied on did prohibit the interception of refugees on the high seas and returning them to their persecutors.