Eleventh Circuit Upholds Jurisdictional Stripping in Immigration Adjustment Case
In the case of John Doe v. Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, adjudicated by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit on March 20, 2023, the court addressed significant issues pertaining to the jurisdiction of federal courts over immigration-related administrative decisions.
Summary of the Judgment
The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals delivered a per curiam opinion affirming the District Court's dismissal of Ahmed's lawsuit. The court primarily upheld the District Court's determination that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i), which explicitly strips federal courts of jurisdiction to review decisions regarding the granting of relief under § 1255 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).
great dig! alright, some people from the past figured out how to get around the woke activist judges of the future (our present)
In lawfare "theory," laws are regarded more like suggestions, providing potential work-arounds for anyone willing to expend hours upon hours of research time in finding them. This application of theory is based upon the hundreds of thousands of pages we call the US Code and the even more tens of thousands of pages of challenge cases and the tens of thousands of pages of the lengthy explanations of the case rulings. Not to mention the hundreds of thousands of pages of appeals rulings, and the tens of thousands of pages of SC(r)OTUS rulings.
Lawfare theory is often successfully applied during the appeals process because the understanding is that for any one ruling, there are often multiple appeals cases that set conflicting precedents. Often the conflicting precedents come from multiple jurisdictions or States. It really gets confusing when there's multiple federal jurisdictions that reside inside a single state like TX, NY, California, FL, etc. The originators of lawfare theory "understand" that what may be "legal" in one jurisdiction may not necessarily be considered "legal" in an other jurisdiction based on ideas like overall population demographics, political leanings of judge or jury, religious leanings, and/or the interpretations and legal understanding of the judges themselves.
After 250 years of existence, our federal legal framework has become such that it is nearly impossible for any one person to know, and more importantly, fully understand it while also correctly applying it to any or all cases, ideas, thoughts, etc. The gargantuan legal code and it's framework has become so bloated (in my opinion this was intentional) that even if you have a team of lawyers and legal aides working on your behalf, the chances are fairly high that something will be missed and an incorrect ruling or application of the law would be made. Coincidentally, this is the basis of understanding of lawfare theory application. "Show me the law, and I will show you the legal work-around." Similar in practice to "show me the man, and I will show you the crimes he's committed."
This is how judges like Boasberg believe they are able to make rulings that go against the Executive Branch's applications of US Code, even when the Judiciary may not have jurisprudence to make such rulings. "Make the ruling first, regardless of legality, then challenge anyone to find the precedent or correct understanding of the statute that would overturn it."
Whenever we do finally get around to tearing down and rebuilding our various levels of govt, we need to seriously and critically examine this theory and it's applications to find ways of limiting the practice.
Amazing how the 10 commandments have withstood the test of time.
That most people are smart and good enough to follow most of the 10 commandments most of the time, is a testament to how well it was written and how simple it is to follow. At least we have that.
I'm pretty sure that there was a recent (in the past 3 yrs or so) SCOTUS ruling that case law isn't law. Thomas or Alito for the win, again.
Moving forward, what needs to be codified into law is that each case is unique and precedent is irrelevant. That combined with a clear statement that law is for the common man and not for a group of black robed mystics to control us with.
It's almost like Lawfare was built by someone who likes to argue with God.
I wonder (((who))) invented lawfare.
The real laws have been on the books and in the constitution forever. They just need to follow and uphold them if they weren't demo hacks and paid for.
I think everyone who flew to El Salvador, attempted to assist Abrego Garcia can be fined, imprisoned up to 10 years or both.
We know Abrego Garcia was caught trafficking humans in Tennessee.
This is a deportable crime.
Look at section E SMUGGLING
8 U.S. Code § 1227 - Deportable aliens
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1227
Abrego Garcia is inadmissible to return to the USA.
Look here at section H:
8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens
(H) Significant traffickers in persons
(i)In general
Any alien who commits or conspires to commit human trafficking offenses in the United States or outside the United States, or who the consular officer, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Secretary of State, or the Attorney General knows or has reason to believe is or has been a knowing aider, abettor, assister, conspirator, or colluder with such a trafficker in severe forms of trafficking in persons, as defined in the section 7102 of title 22, is inadmissible.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182
Now look here: Any person who knowingly aids or assists any alien inadmissible under section 1182 (ABOVE)
8 U.S.C. United States Code, 2023 Edition Title 8 - ALIENS AND NATIONALITY CHAPTER 12
§1327. Aiding or assisting certain aliens to enter
Any person who knowingly aids or assists any alien inadmissible under section 1182(a)(2) (insofar as an alien inadmissible under such section has been convicted of an aggravated felony) or 1182(a)(3) (other than subparagraph (E) thereof) of this title to enter the United States, or who connives or conspires with any person or persons to allow, procure, or permit any such alien to enter the United States, shall be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2023-title8/html/USCODE-2023-title8-chap12-subchapII-partVIII-sec1327.htm#
^this
It's obvio
I will submit that we do not have the right to administer "due process" TO THE CITIZENS OF OTHER COUNTRIES. That's because they do NOT fall under our jurisdiction when they are not our citizens.
Illegals can be arrested under "probable cause" the same way any citizen can be arrested.
But once arrested, if it is found that the person is an illegal then They Go Home. They're no longer our problem because the U.S. does not have jurisdiction over the citizens of other countries.
This is all about jurisdiction, which is also what birthright citizenship comes down to.
"Jurisdiction" is defined by the Oxford Dictionary as "the official power to make legal decisions and judgments." And THAT is the job of a person's home country, not some other country.
Their home country has jurisdiction and will decide what to do with them (if anything.) But we don't really care because the illegal will be GONE and is no longer our problem.
AND JUST TO GIVE CREDENCE TO THE WORD "JURISDICTION" let's look at Black's Law Dictionary:
https://thelawdictionary.org/?s=Jurisdiction
TRANSFER OF JURISDICTION the transfer of a case from a state court to the federal courts.
ANCILLARY JURISDICTION the right of a court that can aid and regulate decisions reached in an original suit but in a different court.
LACK OF JURISDICTION a term that means the lack of power to act or the lack of authority in a legal matter.
TITLE JURISDICTION the term applied when the title to a mortgaged property is kept by the mortgagee until the owner has paid off the mortgage in full.
AMBULATORY JURISDICTION the jurisdiction that is limited just to one area but can be effected in several different places.
WANT OF JURISDICTION
SPECIAL JURISDICTION a court that has the power to handle certain cases that are specified by law and is called a court of special jurisdiction.
CONCURRENT JURISDICTION an authority that has been conferred on 2 or more courts to hear and decide similar cases. Or it is the jurisdiction of a government agency and a court with the same jurisdiction.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION The authority of a court that tried the case originally.
MILITARY JURISDICTION The authority of military law. 1. When the US is at peace or war. 2. When the US is engaged in war outside its boundaries. 3. Rebellion in the US.
FOREIGN JURISDICTION the authority to hear and try a case from beyond your own borders.
FULL JURISDICTION This term applies to the authority to hear, try and decide a case.
EQUITY JURISDICTION an authority that is based on the nature of a matter, and it will be dealt with an equitable deliberation and not one of laws.
PENDENT JURISDICTION the name of a federal doctrine where a plaintiff can rely on federal and no -federal relief grounds.
LIMITED JURISDICTION the term applied to the authority or jurisdiction of a lower court.
EXCESS OF JURISDICTION This occurs when a case is heard by the right jurisdiction, but the judge then exceeds his jurisdiction when giving judgment.\
UNION JURISDICTION
TAX JURISDICTION An area, city, municipality, county, country with its own distinct regulations for taxation.
JURISDICTIONAL STRIKE Illegal strike in an organization over a particular group of employees in dispute about the right to represent an existing trade union. PROROGATED JURISDICTION
In Scotch law. A power conferred by consent of the parties upon a judge who would not otherwise be competent.
AND this is where one of the ways law-fare comes into play due to the amount of meanings to words!!!!!!!
👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👍❤️🇺🇸
Really, really significant.
FYI, Link doesn't work now.
I just tried it, worked fine for me.
Hmm. Weird. Getting an error message. Thanks.
Are you using a VPN?
Me too. Try a different IP or different ISP?