Y A W N.
I suppose this sort of open distain -- for the orders of the New Jersey federal district courts. . . is the new "normal" -- for ICE and DHS, under Kristi Noem's banal and evil control. Still, it is an affront to civil justice, in the impartial /non-partisan sense of that notion.
The readership will recall that Mr. Khalil (holding a lawful student visa, here in the US - with all required papers) has 100% won his release on $1 bond, and his return to NY/NJ. As we all now know (and a federal court judge has ruled!), he was taken without due process (essentially kidnapped by the Noemites), and held in Jena Louisiana for nearly three months (missing the birth of his first child -- a US citizen, with his US citizen wife) -- for speaking peacefully at Columbia University, against this Mal-administration's actions in Gaza. He is trying to get the last of his immigation court proceedings moved back to NJ/NY -- as the statutes require of Noem. She is actively resisting, by refusing to file required paperwork in Jena. Damn -- here's that, in a three page overnight letter, from his lawyers:
. . .[Mr. Khalil] filed a motion for change of venue on July 18, 2025, seeking a transfer to the New York immigration court, as is the norm when an immigration detainee is released from detention and returns to their home. DHS opposed the change of venue in immigration court on July 28, 2025, and Petitioner submitted a reply on July 29, 2025. Despite this being a routine motion that would normally be granted as a matter of course when the detainee is released, the motion remains pending before the Jena, Louisiana immigration court today. Moreover, on July 22, 2025, Petitioner’s counsel inquired through counsel for ICE about when DHS intended to file the Form I-830 with the immigration court, as required by applicable regulations following an immigration detainee’s release or relocation. See 8 CFR 236.1; 8 CFR 1003.19(g) (“[T]he Service shall immediately advise the Immigration Court having administrative control over the Record of Proceeding of a change in the respondent/applicant’s custody location or of release from Service custody. . . .
This notification shall be in writing and shall state the effective date of the change in custody location or status, and the respondent/applicant’s current fixed street address, including zip code.”). The filing of this form ordinarily triggers a change of venue. Petitioner’s counsel have received no reply to their inquiry and Respondents do not appear to have complied with the regulatory requirement. . . .
What a pack of embittered misanthropes these political hacks are. Damn. Out -- to a summer city-street market, tonight.
नमस्ते
No comments:
Post a Comment