4 ms·

Recall that Apple is appealing the decision of an agency, not a court. Staying an agency's decision until an actual court can review the agency's decision make

by abduhl 3y ago

Recall that Apple is appealing the decision of an agency, not a court. Staying an agency's decision until an actual court can review the agency's decision makes sense. An analogy: migrants seeking asylum in the USA should be permitted to remain in the USA until their appeals process is completed even after an immigration judge decides not to grant the asylum-seeker asylum.

gnicholas 3y ago
Interesting example. There are plenty of other examples that go the other way, for example if someone is found guilty of a crime but is appealing it. The default rule is that you are imprisoned during appeal. This is of concern to Trump supporters right now, since the precedent is so strong that it's not clear that being a top candidate for POTUS may not be enough to warrant an exception.
- abduhl 3y ago
  Guilty of a crime implies an actual judicial proceeding, not an administrative proceeding. Administrative proceedings occur under the powers of the executive branch alone.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
ClumsyPilot 3y ago
That's a terrible example. It onky holds true for actions that are irrevensible or interfere with the legal process. Capital punsihment is also not administered untill appeals are finished. Obviously you can't attend a court hearing if you have already been killed or deported.
- gnicholas 3y ago
  > Obviously you can't attend a court hearing if you have already been killed or deported. I wouldn't be surprised if there were a reversion to the "remain in Mexico" policy in the coming months. This flipped the presumption on whether the applicant was going to prevail on the merits, presumably because such a small percentage do ultimately qualify. There is a growing sentiment, including in bright blue cities, that the current system, which presumes applicants will qualify for asylum, is not tenable.

4 ms·

Recall that Apple is appealing the decision of an agency, not a court. Staying an agency's decision until an actual court can review the agency's decision make

by abduhl 3y ago

gnicholas 3y ago
Interesting example. There are plenty of other examples that go the other way, for example if someone is found guilty of a crime but is appealing it. The default rule is that you are imprisoned during appeal. This is of concern to Trump supporters right now, since the precedent is so strong that it's not clear that being a top candidate for POTUS may not be enough to warrant an exception.
- abduhl 3y ago
  Guilty of a crime implies an actual judicial proceeding, not an administrative proceeding. Administrative proceedings occur under the powers of the executive branch alone.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
ClumsyPilot 3y ago
That's a terrible example. It onky holds true for actions that are irrevensible or interfere with the legal process. Capital punsihment is also not administered untill appeals are finished. Obviously you can't attend a court hearing if you have already been killed or deported.
- gnicholas 3y ago
  > Obviously you can't attend a court hearing if you have already been killed or deported. I wouldn't be surprised if there were a reversion to the "remain in Mexico" policy in the coming months. This flipped the presumption on whether the applicant was going to prevail on the merits, presumably because such a small percentage do ultimately qualify. There is a growing sentiment, including in bright blue cities, that the current system, which presumes applicants will qualify for asylum, is not tenable.