|
|
Post by charlsiekate on Jan 23, 2020 21:29:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by statman on Jan 23, 2020 21:47:19 GMT -5
Vey simple. The administration has the power under Article II to do whatever it wants.
|
|
|
|
Post by carrickfergus on Jan 24, 2020 9:46:56 GMT -5
Didn't we use to be a nation of laws?
|
|
|
|
Post by ba on Jan 24, 2020 9:49:11 GMT -5
Wow. From Easterbrook. Brutal.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Jan 24, 2020 15:12:43 GMT -5
I have been around the legal system a long time, and I have never seen anything like this. Pixie
|
|
Sassy
Full Member
Posts: 37 
|
Post by Sassy on Jan 24, 2020 18:25:57 GMT -5
I have been around the legal system a long time, and I have never seen anything like this. Pixie Ditto. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2020 18:30:46 GMT -5
This administration is in charge. Legislature and judicial branches do not matter. They and us better learn to live with the new executive branch.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmyjiggles on Jan 24, 2020 18:54:41 GMT -5
His application for the U visa will never get approved. It will be interesting to see if the government decides to appeal this, just ignores it, or goes along with it and denies the visa. |
|
|
|
Post by lurkerbelow on Jan 24, 2020 19:11:04 GMT -5
Wow. I am so very glad that I do not work in a particularly political branch. That one will be taught in law school, for sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by alohastate on Jan 25, 2020 0:30:27 GMT -5
This is the logical extreme of the unitary executive theory. The courts have been extremely naive. And threats of contempt are hollow when the executive has the power to pardon. Just for the sake of discussion. If anyone is interested in listening to the oral argument. It’s really short. www.courtlistener.com/audio/67959/jorge-baez-sanchez-v-william-barr/Baillez-Sanchez against Barr? I could have sworn this was a Latin-American name, not French. |
|
|
|
Post by alohastate on Jan 25, 2020 0:32:11 GMT -5
I have been around the legal system a long time, and I have never seen anything like this. Pixie I am rather dumbfounded yet entertained. |
|
|
|
Post by alohastate on Jan 25, 2020 0:42:55 GMT -5
This is the logical extreme of the unitary executive theory. The courts have been extremely naive. And threats of contempt are hollow when the executive has the power to pardon. Just for the sake of discussion. If anyone is interested in listening to the oral argument. It’s really short. www.courtlistener.com/audio/67959/jorge-baez-sanchez-v-william-barr/Q: "So why haven't you filed a confession of error?" A: "Ummmm" Q: "So we do the required thing of sending it to the Board (of Immigration Appeals), and the Board chooses to give us the bird. What are we supposed to do next? A: "Uh, right. Uh. A second chance?" Q: "We've given them a second chance." A: "A third chance then?" The most entertaining argument I have ever heard, and yet so much more congenial then I would have expcted! |
|
|
|
Post by alohastate on Jan 25, 2020 0:55:02 GMT -5
7th Circuit Appellate Panel: "I take it that the members of the Board are attorneys. I am very confident that the Attorney General is an attorney. . . . If the Board members don't understand that, they need to go back to Law School."
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmyjiggles on Jan 25, 2020 0:59:01 GMT -5
Listening to the audio is by turns jaw-dropping and cringe inducing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Loopstok on Jan 25, 2020 2:10:36 GMT -5
Man. And I thought I was pushing it by pointing out a factual error in a DC remand order that I re-heard last year.
I love that this decision uses the word "effrontery", and also goes The Full Clickbait by including the sentence "What happened next beggars belief".
|
|
|
|
Post by unlisted on Jan 25, 2020 7:55:00 GMT -5
I don't see a disturbing executive overreach here - just cringe-inducing incompetence. Agencies can do whatever they want with internal delegation. They don't need to go through notice-and-comment rulemaking. They just need to publish the new arrangement in the Federal Register *before* they implement it. Delegation has been screwed up before, on issues like who gets to sign off on formal assertions of privilege in litigation. But usually those screw-ups are quietly buried. Remember the H2B regulations, which were invalidated because DHS didn't properly delegate reg writing authority to DOL? Shit happens. What's shocking here is that DOJ didn't have the sense to manage its shit without embarrassing itself at the Circuit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thomas fka Lance on Jan 25, 2020 9:19:56 GMT -5
I don't see a disturbing executive overreach here - just cringe-inducing incompetence. Agencies can do whatever they want with internal delegation. They don't need to go through notice-and-comment rulemaking. They just need to publish the new arrangement in the Federal Register *before* they implement it. Delegation has been screwed up before, on issues like who gets to sign off on formal assertions of privilege in litigation. But usually those screw-ups are quietly buried. Remember the H2B regulations, which were invalidated because DHS didn't properly delegate reg writing authority to DOL? Shit happens. What's shocking here is that DOJ didn't have the sense to manage its shit without embarrassing itself at the Circuit. Whether overreach. incompetence, or some other cause, the issues presented here inspire less than a great deal of confidence in the abilities of those involved. Listening to the oral arguments was fascinating, well worth the 20 minutes. |
|
|
|
Post by redsox1 on Jan 25, 2020 10:17:23 GMT -5
I did not have a chance to listen yet but I usually feel sorry for the attorney sent out to defend upper management issues. Perhaps because as an insurance defense attorney, on several occasions, had to defend decisions that were, to put charitably, screwed up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Jan 25, 2020 12:59:51 GMT -5
I did not have a chance to listen yet but I usually feel sorry for the attorney sent out to defend upper management issues. Perhaps because as an insurance defense attorney, on several occasions, had to defend decisions that were, to put charitably, screwed up. The Court actually wasn't hard on him at all. As another poster said, much more congenial than I would have expected. Pixie |
|
otter
New Member
Posts: 16 
|
Post by otter on Jan 25, 2020 13:33:55 GMT -5
Anybody read the actual BIA decision? I was in a section at the DOJ mothership in the mid 2000s when OIL was sending these cases out to the rest of the Department. Based on that limited experience my guess is the BIA decision results from incompetence or ignorance.
I don’t quite get the statement that DOJ didn’t confess error. The BIA speaks for the AG on these issues, so DOJ attorneys are in a box. There are only 2 choices, defend or ask for remand. Asking the court to remand, and not defending at all, is code for saying the BIA screwed up. I’m sure DOJ counsel would have loved the authority to make the Board reopen but he can’t do that.
Now I’m a former 11 bravo bullet catcher (and I’m married) so I’m well aware that I don’t know what I’m talking about. So who knows.
|
|
