[Orin Kerr, February 29, 2008 at 12:23am] Trackbacks
Bies v. Bagley:
Decision of the Day has a post on the Sixth Circuit's latest capital habeas case, Bies v. Bagley. Bob's take: While the decision granting habeas relief is "remarkable" and "creative," in the end "reversal is inevitable."
Dave N (mail):
The 6th Circuit (or at least elements on it) evidently want to become known as "The New 9th."
2.29.2008 10:43am
sherlock (mail):
Having two children who were born abroad of a non-US-citzen mother, and not in any US territorial enclave of any kind, I can attest that the ONLY thing I had to demostrate to the US Consulate to gain them US Passports was that I was their legal father and that their mother and I were legally married. This was a bit of a hassle since I had previously been married and divorced, and thus had to produce evidence of that divorce as well as my current marriage certificate.

But this question only arose as to the status of the children as my legal children, NOT to their right to US citizenship at birth, even with ONLY ONE US citizen parent.

The certificates issued by the Consulate to them that allowed them to apply for passports states very explicitly that each "... is a US Citizen, and has been so since birth." End of discussion IMHO.
2.29.2008 12:10pm
GV:
Having read the decision, it looks right to me, but perhaps I'm misssing something. There's no analysis at Decision of the Day, so I'd be interested to hear why anyone (including apparently Dave N), thinks this decision is wrong.
2.29.2008 12:15pm
sef:
GV:

The opinion isn't wrong, far from it. The question in Bies is law of the case / res judicata when it comes to state court adjudications of mental retardation. The opinion isn't that controversial, its just not likely to survive.

The Sixth Circuit has under Bush II, however, become very conservative &the panel's decision won't likely stand.

And as far as Dave N is concerned, check his past posts, he has his own baggage.
2.29.2008 9:20pm