against the citizenship and immigration services just ask you i find it very difficult to imagine a situation in which we would find an equal protection violation on constitutional grounds without st having reached and therefore render the counsel i take it i think that's one of your examples from your brief date is that understood universally or are there circumstances where the context here is working but judge hamilton's question and mine is about how the word stepchild who's generally understood him of all your brief cites a few circumstances where it's understood is continuing after divorce or death so i'm asking whether there are circumstances where it does not mr hall ask this argument boils down to well it's all just a matter of common linguistic usage i wonder if it is a secrets to tell you i asked my walker ex to do a comprehensive survey they found some examples where courts held that the relation continued after divorce or death they found some examples maybe more where the court held that it didn't continue after death and of course if that's what the legal landscape looks like the next question would be doesn't the agency get to choose at least if it decides to invoke chevron of deference to agency interpretations let me tell you i was i did not see a citation to chevron in the agency's brief do you understand them to be relying on chevron  watch one should start going down the road of replacing english words with weird initialisms it seems really hard to stop but it does help us in general  i must say counsel all this talk about intent leaves me call you do you actually claim the ability to look inside the heads of five hundred and thirty five members of congress and see what's there they relying on the word is begs the question whether one can be a step child after the step parents divorce were gath your adversary is cited page nineteen of the opening brief and then again in the reply brief a bunch of legal doctrines that say or assume that the step child relation continues are there contrary  considerably and your brief addressed other bodies of law rather than the present tense verb is which doesn't at all help figure out the meaning of the word stepchild i'm asking parent i think that gives that race the inference that we naturally terminate as a matter of law the regulation in the in the treasury department context is in the tax context is what gives it that continuing effect that you know allows the relationship to example would be oh we could face this kind of problem we ought to try to give a clear answer to it we obviously don't have that in the immigration and nationality act provisions of the violence against women act  implausible interpretation of any language in the statute it must come from someplace else is it an understanding based on normal and statutory linguistic understanding of the interpretation in federal law which is itself her going back to the common law in other words it's not even remotely based on the language of the statute but i do believe it is your honor would have listened to my conversation with mr o'toole don't use weird initialisms it suffices to use real words now my question has the agency ever interpreted this language on its own or is it relying entirely on our i believe it is relying entirely on our and that's pursuant to statute decisions of the attorney general are binding by statute on employees of the department of homeland security of which citizenship and immigration service is a part along with the application and the gist was that to emphasize that he would not be kind of if that would be sufficient and you're saying but maybe it would be if that would be sufficient isn't that kind of a perverse sort of in the statutory language about who is or was a step child is sometimes because she doesn't have a continuing relationship with her abuser but if she's not picked up by by by government agents then she were to agree well let me ask you one more point if i ask that as a rhetorical question her reply brief and i guess i'd like to get your response why does it make sense to allow a battered spouse to self petition after plain language of the statute and agree with ms or guido's arguments or at least some of them what unwelcome consequences do you see for other cases and under immigration law child or stepchild so it's really it's there's it's difficult you know say exact all of us untie me asking i'm asking for your parade of horribles if you know our hearts are touched in our brains or persuaded the misery we owe should be entitled to really here give me your parade of horribles i think what it does is it mounts together separate statutory requirements that congress laid out congress made a very specific avenue for relief for individuals who seek to file a family based immigration petition and all out individuals who were subject to abuse in her speaking are subject to abuse or petition because