began i'd like to thank counsel for your cooperation with the court in accommodating this argument by telephone this morning and thank you for your cooperation with mr barr of the circuit executive office and mr robinson will serve as our courtroom deputy mr robinson as the time keeper and we'll let you know how much time you have left before we begin i can tell you that the panel has not previously made it illegal to possess false version of official documents that a person could use to trickle on for cement or to hinder enforcement of the nation's criminal and immigration law and order supervision is just such a document and that's wh and what that statute does is it makes it illegal to possess false or fraudulent versions of a number of documents and let me quote a list of documents exactly it's quote any immigrant or nonimmigrant visa permit border crossing card alien registration receipt card or other document prescribed by statute or regulation for entry into or as evidence of authorized day or employment in the united states and quote and of course we're relying on the final document and arguing that it's not prescribed by statute or regulation issue is evidence of authorized it is really i think that the the point or the argument that the other side is is relying on i have a question because no one's sort of raised this issue but obviously when you interpret a statute one of the things that you can rely on obviously other than the plain meaning of the language in t a list of things that are specific and then a general term is included in that list that implies that the general term relates to the specific guidance so obviously other documents can only mean documents such as the ones that were specifically enumerated and the statute which are documents that evidence such a document yes your honor thank you for bringing that up i yes i agree and i believe our interpretation is completely consistent with the jews i'm generous you're right that conventionally when you interpret a long list does that the order of supervision does fit within the broad category of that indicated by the earlier items because the earlier items are old documents as we state in our brief that are generated by the immigration law regime or enforcement regime of our country and order of supervision is also a document generated by the immigration enforcement regime of this country and it's also one that evidences or demonstrates that the bearer is entitled not entitled but i to stay temperate have a temporary stay in the country or in the in the community that they didn't respond to correct and in many cases it will be the only document they have that the test is there having gone through that entire procedure that i think in terms of how the order of how that procedure would happen the order would be revoked st and then the person would be removed but i want to be clear at the border there's not any sort of additional process that's required realizes that removal can be effectuated for instance if the person bearer of the order receives valid travel documentation to a country that we allow the removal to the order would simply be rescinded and then the person would be single expressed list that we can rely upon our position is that you have to look at the statutes or regulations that provide or prescribe for the issuance of such documents and discern what is a provision that document this but  thirteen to a secondary extent and what in particular to forty one five prescribe there provide for the issuance of an order of supervision and cases where removal cannot be effectuated in a timely fashion and our point is if you look at those regulations and the statute the only purpose of the regulations in statute is to create a documentary that evidence is the fact that the person is allowed to remain in the united states while we provide evidence of an individual's status support to avoid arrest of my wrong about that you're not wrong about the language of the statute but my point is that that's the purpose of the statue in other words that document is the only removal is that was and should provision precisely there's nothing out there given there's no sort of id card right there's no analogue to a green card there's not a red card or anything that says they belong in this situation but the order with that order supervision is the document that authorizes the temporary stay of that in the country yes exactly it reflects that they have been allowed to remain in the country  it is the evidence of that particular form of permitted i mean if if if if if the order of supervision didn't have any value then no one would be paying three thousand dollars for five exactly correct judge to respond and or removed on a certain date it's going to be removed let's say in a month one is being is remains in custody and the other one is being allowed to be at launch your assuming that that's marked off on the order supervision i mean that the point of the order supervision is that they've gone through the factors that's in the c f r and the regulation and determined that this alien is is has the ability to remain at large in the community exactly arm remain is large enough remains the fact that i did it at st but the but the language of the statute at issue here says evidence of authorized sta and when you look any construe a statute you have to give the statute its original i'm playing meaning if if if the statute doesn't have any technical term you have to give plain and ordinary meanings to the to the terms used in the statu looking at the statute here so as minutes of authorized stay the question is if you have a document what is the document that shows evidence of an alien's authorization to state pending removal what would that document form twenty b says you've been ordered removed actually said document showing that you have no right to be here and the only thing you've stated that you can be at large which means you don't have to be in custody you still have to leave and they can still send you away law do you can see that there are people there are people who are in the united states currently or there's a supervision who are valid who have been here for years and who are currently legally you will have to apply for it means that you're not in custody and the united custody because you know the government either working on actively removing you or because you know if there is no place that they can send you to but you somebody to go and obtain a passport and they are telling the island go get a passport and as soon as you get the passport we're sending you away and that's the purpose of an order was a good vision it's not and another document and and the section  something needs to be done for the green good to be taken away a person with a fine or over deportation nothing needs to happen for him to be put on a plane and sent back home and that's the difference between an order of supervision country even even if it's for a temporary theory and as i said before in order supervision has zero effect on the time a person can be in the united states doesn't change a thing  about change or status and as i said if you have two people that are being ordered removed one in custody one is being out let out to get a passport or or to be at large under certain conditions the question is does the person that and within that point two there's actually specific provision for how these release orders can be revoked and in particular it says release may be revoked in the exercise of discretion when in the opinion of the revoking this document which is evidence that the person is allowed to remain in the country is revoke before they are removed assuming that removal become feasible at some point during the period of supervision the nd point and related one is this circumscribed period of authorized so i think indefinite or temporary periods of authorized stay fit perfectly within the language of the statute and there's no preference given to documents like a visa that have a defined and date however  even as a factual matter these orders of supervision come with some definite and date so that's not it doesn't mean that the elian is entitled guaranteed to be in the country until that date but that is the date at which the document expires so in that sense it is very similar to the stuff and as the record shows below we have a declaration from an official who says that an order of supervision typically issue for a period of one year that docket entry fifty three dash one page two and even if you look at mr chinchilla fraudulent orders of supervision which are on the record at docket entry forty six dollars gash one dollar forty six cents dash two you'll see in the final page that is identifying page means next reporting date in other words the date at which he would have to come back and present himself to an ice officials again that order would end and then he would if he's still going to remain in the country could be issued another one for a period of another year as i as is evidence that you are not authorized to stay in the united states what do you have to say about that argument yes i think back slate the idea that the alien or the person the bearer has no legal status which i think we all agree with a person under a legitimate order supervision has been ordered removed so they have no legal status in the country they should not be in the country however that conflates the idea of legal status with whether they're temporarily being allowed to stay here in other words whether they're authorized to stay here pending removal pending the feasibility of removal and the latter concept to me as a broader concept and the language that congress chose to use and forty six dollars a implies that they meant a broader concept meaning that any sort of allowance to stay in the country even if it's not a legal status suffices under the statute and this is why i want to bring up an analogy i hope this is helpful but it let me ask you before your before your analogy are there statutes or regulations that identify documents that are that indicate that you're authorized to stay in the united states that specifically state that this is a document that identifies an emigrant ability to stay in the united states far there are documents on their statutes regulations that identify those documents documents that specifically state that you're authorized to stay in the united states i don't believe there are documents that use that exact language now as a practical matter if we see a person green card or some type of immigrant or nonimmigrant be said there will be a date and so the implication the sort of purpose that you draw from seeing that document and your understanding of its purpose in the larger legal scheme is this is the period in which the person is allowed to stay but i do not think if you look at a card a green card or even any of these other documents none of them have on their face a box that says authorized a period and then a range of date security regulations there is a provision in the regulations that expressly says that aliens residing in the united states under orders of supervision it defines them as quote unquote aliens who are permanently residing in the united states under color of law  for the purposes of social supplemental security income so that just goes to show even in other contexts this document the order of supervision is evidence that the person in the parlance of the s s a is permanently residing in the authorization to work that's also under eight c f r to forty one point five and then if they get the authorization to work they also are entitled to receive public health benefits under the affordable act and that's provided they're forty five c f r one hundred and fifty two dollars and so i do want to make clear for that it's not just the order of supervision alone they have to be ordered supervision work obtaining other type of authorization be the way i read the regulations in the social security context you only need the order of supervision i don't think it requires the work authorization if anything if you think about it the purpose would be more consistent right if you have an order to provision and no ability to work that is kind of what would make you would give you a greater need to have supplemental security income so i think that's why that regulation only requires the order government's argument will not have to disregard the language in the statute prescribed by statute or regulation no your honor and  prescribed by statute or regulation means that st of all the document is official document in other words it's not an ad hoc document and if there's an official documents regularly issued it is provided for by specific regulation and then more  liberty and that that's why they like for instance if you went into a social security office and said i want to apply for s s i benefits they would ask you ok what documents you have how can you prove to us that you're allowed to be here that you are an alien permanently residing in the united states could have left out all this language other document prescribed by statute or regulation but there's got to be a meaning for that for that language in the statute otherwise that that's what i mean what  like what we're doing is we're deciding this case based on what congress met but not what it said commandment this was my question my follow up question the under the is part of the same group that has a specific group of bees that permit border crossing airing registration cards obviously those are separate and apart from other documents but the other document means it has to be a similar document but if prescribed by statute or regulation because obviously congress is saying maybe we're going to do other documents we're not going to do an all inclusive list so we're going to include this to a statutory construction specific statutes or regulations that have to be coming out of the immigration regime of the country and it has to be something and that's official and regularly issued not an ad hoc document so as a counterexample for instance imagine i had a court transcript in the court transcript a government officer answers a line of questioning and says oh yes mr wu is a united states citizens of course he's allowed to remain in the country but that is a document and shit is evidence of my authorized is much closer if it's within that category because it's issued by the same authority it has an identification page it looks like an identification document and its purpose and its only purpose is to  when the bearer hold it to be proof that they are allowed to be here and i can see that it's different because it's a temporary stay but that lease that does not have significance or that does not pull it out of the means it's a temporary residence exactly your honor i agree with that if the panel has no further questions i'll spare this group the analogy that i was going to draw because it's clear that court understand their argument we can we can hear your analogy i'm curious well in that case i was going to analogize it as they imagine the statute says authorized a in my home there's going to be a few different ways in which you could be authorized to stay at my house one as i send you a formal invitation or an e mail that says please come to dinner at my house you are my guest or stay overnight but the other way is imagine a traveling salesman come to my home and then a huge rain storm breaks out or even a hurricane that could last a few days and out of kindness although i don't necessarily want that person to be there and i didn't invite them myself i say ok now you're allowed to stay until the storm passes that la that was an order of supervision and if a person that we did not invite we do not necessarily we did not intend for them to be in our country and we may even want them to leave our country but as a practical matter that cannot happen right now and for humanitarian reason we're not going to send the person out into the storm the the permission to for them to stay here is not a permanent one it does not have a definite term it's just until the end of this you know emergency situation that exits in c but nonetheless it's a form in which they're allowed to stay at my house and that's exactly what we have with an order of supervision the statute it's a temporary allowance for the person to remain here until their removal can be effectuated and for that reason we respectfully ask the court