Thread by @fashionlook4u

Good Morning everyone! This @NicoletteGlazer twitting as a guest to my mom's account coz Twitter think blocking trolls is automation or twitting about Admin's appalling immigration policies & practices is harassing. So this is twitter version of moving into ur parent's basement.

@NicoletteGlazer Well it is worth the embarrassment because it is a big, big day at the 9th Circuit today. Both the Asylum Ban and #RemaininMexico (MPP) are up for oral argument back to back and it WILL be epic.
ca9.uscourts.gov/media/view_vid…

thread by @NicoletteGlazer

@NicoletteGlazer 1/ Here we go. Asylum Ban I is first. Panel is Judges Fernandez, Fletcher, and Paez. Good but tough panel.

@NicoletteGlazer 2/ Scott Stewart is arguing for the Appellant, the Admin. First argument is that panel motion decision is not law of the case. Arg that if the motion panel is clearly erroneous this panel could disregard the prior motion decision. Judge Fletcher is suspicious.

@NicoletteGlazer 3/ Judge Paez is rephrasing by shifting to the difference of what was before the panel as compared to what is before this merits panel. Govt counsel is missing the lifeline they gave him. #AsylumBan oral argument.

@NicoletteGlazer 4/Govt is pressing standing and justiciability because the harm is "speculative" and is not a direct injury because the affected asylum seekers can challenge the rule in their individual removal proceedings. As a collorally Govt is arg that INA is limited to non-citizens &

@NicoletteGlazer 5/ & third parties such as NGOs (who are the plaintiffs here) are not within the zone of interest covered by the INA. This argument has a superficial appeal as IJ has no jurisdiction over anyone who is not a non-citizen. But the superficial appeal stops there.

@NicoletteGlazer 6/ The court is hitting the point directly, the Act as enacted by Congress is that anyone who is in the US can apply for asylum whether arrival was at POE or not at a designated port of entry. The Govt has not answer other than whining that AG has authority to enact regs.

@NicoletteGlazer 7/ Govt is missing the point by arguing that asylum is "discretionary" and that no one is entitled to be granted asylum. Trying to move the goal post from applying for asylum which the text guarantees to being granted asylum.

@NicoletteGlazer 8/ Govt is out of time but Panel asked to address APA's notice & comment requirements. Response is "foreign policy impact" and "good cause". Basically, we don't need to comply with the APA in implementing regulations because we are in a big hurry & want to address "surge".

@NicoletteGlazer 9/ Predictive judgment agues DHS, Judge Fletcher: "some call it predictive judgement, some called it speculation". Love it.

@NicoletteGlazer 10/ ACLU is up and arguing for humanity.

@NicoletteGlazer 11/ Notice & Comments requirement of the APA must be taken seriously. Govt cant possibly arguing urgency when POTUS went on TV to declare it will be enacting #AsylumBan.

@NicoletteGlazer 12/ Published stay decision is binding on the merit panel, ACLU argues. Judge Paez shifts back to whether motion panel and merit panel are faced w same question. Answer: it is on Qs on law that it is binding wehther under law of the case or law of the circuit.

@NicoletteGlazer 13/ I think that if the panel goes into whether law of the case applies to motion panel decision, it will go to en banc.

@NicoletteGlazer 14/ Standing is a big issue as with all regulatory immigration challenges. Jursidctional limits under 1252 not applicable to organizations only to individuals. This is the biggest problem with such an argument. It disallows affected non-citizens to obtain judicial review but ...

@NicoletteGlazer 15/ .. but organizations are not affected by the 1252 jurisdictional stripping provisions. Kinda flips the idea of protection and zone of interests on its head.

@NicoletteGlazer 16/ Strange Q by judge Paez: Since there was a dissent in the stay decision is that suggests that the statute is ambiguous.

@NicoletteGlazer 17/ On the nationwide nature of the injunction: Counsel brings the fact that Govt could not explain how it is practicable or reasonable to impose a geographical restriction. Most ppl will not enter within the 9th Cir and will never come w/in its jurisdiction renedering it nullity

@NicoletteGlazer 18/APA & Immigration cases the default under 9th Circuit precedent is for injucntions to be nationwide. Outch, hope they don't hang the case of that as SCOTUS loves to reverse the 9th, especially under current make up.

@NicoletteGlazer 19/ Based on the argument I think it is pretty obvious that the panel will endorce and expand on Judge Bybee decision on stay finding #AsylumBan must bit the dust. En banc however lurks in the back and there we may be in big troubles.

@NicoletteGlazer 20/ We are now up on the #RemainInMexico case. This will be saucy.

@NicoletteGlazer 21/ Stewart is arguing for Govt again. Asks the panel to vacate the injection entered.

@NicoletteGlazer 22/Judge Fletcher is trying to distinguish panel decision here by focusing on "likely to prevail" language used rather than "here is the answer on the legal question presented". Wow!

@NicoletteGlazer 23/ Govt is boxed and is trying to use a different approach here and should apply because it favors Govt, saying they are arguing for law of the case rather than law of the circuit application.

@NicoletteGlazer 24/ Govt totally flubers on the statutory analysis on the b1 applicant must be filtered in to b2 standrard and placed into 240 proceedings before the return provision in (c) is invoked.