Flashington
Registered Users (C)
Law_person
Please, give us an update with your source of information. What happened on Jan 18th?
Thanks
Please, give us an update with your source of information. What happened on Jan 18th?
Thanks
To Law_person
- Thread starter Flashington
- Start date
EspressoJoy
Registered Users (C)
Yes please
You are clearly the only one who can interpret this:
http://www.ailf.org/lac/asylee_adjustment.asp
Please respond - we'll send you chocolate
You are clearly the only one who can interpret this:
http://www.ailf.org/lac/asylee_adjustment.asp
Please respond - we'll send you chocolate
TortFeasor
Registered Users (C)
My take on it!
I claim no first hand knowledge or insider information about what is going on. But I know "lawyers' speak" when I see it (as I have to practice it every day). Plus a good dose of cynicism on how governments function will shade some light. This is what I think is going on (others with more information, feel free to second-guess my observations which may turn out to be wrong):
1. Negotiations with Justice lawyers has been going on as is evident from the AILA posts. "Our" side has all the great arguments, "they" have zero grounds for their positions. But they do not want to risk an appellate decision further exposing their third world practices.
2. No one in Justice (as they are the ones who are defending the suit on behalf of the INS) wants to make a decision on settlement terms as none of the big enchiladas ("bosses") are yet in office -- Gonzales the would be AG (Attorney General), the deputy AG, the numerous deputy and assistant deputy AGs are still in commotion. So no guidance from the top to give comfort to the settlement negotiators. Government bureaucrats are averse to taking risks.
3. So "they" said: we really want to settle this piece of shit but we need some top clearance, therefore give us more time to get that. The Appeals court says : whatever. AILA and Co. says: OK we will wait for a few while.
Maybe it is or maybe it is not!
I claim no first hand knowledge or insider information about what is going on. But I know "lawyers' speak" when I see it (as I have to practice it every day). Plus a good dose of cynicism on how governments function will shade some light. This is what I think is going on (others with more information, feel free to second-guess my observations which may turn out to be wrong):
1. Negotiations with Justice lawyers has been going on as is evident from the AILA posts. "Our" side has all the great arguments, "they" have zero grounds for their positions. But they do not want to risk an appellate decision further exposing their third world practices.
2. No one in Justice (as they are the ones who are defending the suit on behalf of the INS) wants to make a decision on settlement terms as none of the big enchiladas ("bosses") are yet in office -- Gonzales the would be AG (Attorney General), the deputy AG, the numerous deputy and assistant deputy AGs are still in commotion. So no guidance from the top to give comfort to the settlement negotiators. Government bureaucrats are averse to taking risks.
3. So "they" said: we really want to settle this piece of shit but we need some top clearance, therefore give us more time to get that. The Appeals court says : whatever. AILA and Co. says: OK we will wait for a few while.
Maybe it is or maybe it is not!
EspressoJoy said:You are clearly the only one who can interpret this:
http://www.ailf.org/lac/asylee_adjustment.asp
Please respond - we'll send you chocolate
winlett said:Law_person, why don't you tell them the "3-year decrease" was just a joke?It was a good one though. Some people just don't get it.
Also, could anyone explain where this 1/18 deadline came from? There is obviously no mentioning about this date in that update.
Why don't look thru the previous posting before you draw smart conclusions
TortFeasor
Registered Users (C)
I concur
Dr. Karina, I concur!
(ripped from the "Catch Me If You Can" movie)
Dr. Karina, I concur!
(ripped from the "Catch Me If You Can" movie)
karina said: