The following excerpt is from Barahona-Gomez v. Reno, 167 F.3d 1228 (9th Cir. 1999):
Interpretation of this section in the context of this action would provide an interesting question if it were one of first impression in this circuit, but it is not. While the consolidated appeals were pending, Walters v.
Page 1234
By its terms, the statutory provision relied upon by the government does not prevent the district court from exercising jurisdiction over the plaintiffs' due process claims. Those claims do not arise from a "decision or action by the Attorney General to commence proceedings, adjudicate cases, or execute removal orders against any alien," but instead constitute "general collateral challenges to unconstitutional practices and policies used by the agency." McNary v. Haitian Refugee Ctr., Inc., 498 U.S. 479, 492, 111 S.Ct. 888, 112 L.Ed.2d 1005 (1991).
145 F.3d at 1052 (footnote omitted).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.