judge i'd like to reserve two minutes for republicans it's fun just state your name for the record and everything thank you all over low way with the federal public defender of the district we're going for mr bean ok go ahead good morning they pleased for a couple a way of background mr bean has been forcibly medicated of these once a day were over two years if using the medication will bring on more staff to restrain him and  medication understanding clearly understanding that if he refuses he will be restrained and forcibly medicated so for the past two years or however long it's been eighteen months however long since the sell order he has been a relevant data precludes quote evidence based recommendations for treatment instead you apply that any psychotics are quote were drawn there is a yawning gap between were the products try and sell merits of the sell order but rather determined that younger abstention should apply and just said the other applies exception doesn't work here that some of the they had testimony that was offered by the two competing doctors and it's all very interesting that but there's a major legal hurdle here that you need to get over before we even get there so that would help me if he would the state's failure to establish on our roads our intention the efficacy of any psychotics coupled with us forcing dean to daily risk the permanent physical disability into daily endure involuntary insult to his bodily integrity is intolerable as a matter of process turning now to the legal hurdle of you just mentioned the younger doctrine is in applicable when the value to but i think it's a very strong analogy and i would note that the cases that the state relies on page fifteen of their grave docket eighteen of page twenty eight in none of those the court considering arguments that envelop argue that force medication constitution extraordinary circumstance to avoid the younger abstention i don't think i have another procedure or question that i wanted to remains good law and that holding is whether it is jurisdiction is also available for prisoners claims that he has been something acted reader restrictions of his liberty such as disciplinary segregation without due oregon state law because it requires that he be transferred to a community treatment program or be civilly committed if even with our even with out that kind of release the quantum change in boston where you are subject to forcible medication as opposed to when you were in on our contention is and as i understand it you agree that that they have the the state met that standard you're just arguing the exception and that really centers on the forcible medication which which i thought going into this was prospective b you're saying he's actually been medicated yes yes your honor and of course he continues to be medicated in your position is that that medication being medicated efficiently that determination has not ever been brights as it were so the still order is in place correct apparently they have not had to use force physical force like to start when the younger issue younger abstention the comedy wise of the core of younger and that reflects the understanding as eight cores aren't capable fully right of the conclusion of the trial i do not know the answer to that question correcting whatever bear the district were determined to do it over here i was right your honor it is their right and i was correct in it that f intentional reader and i'm not saying that that would necessarily happen in this case from that potential reader is necessarily going to be based on new facts for example in this case weeks you have you nearly as year and a half years of treatment and it leaves on this record we don't know the i apologize as him out of time if i could do  that it is an issue of law correct jurors subject matter jurisdiction is an issue of law and it is something that is court can and generally must address in the  on that seed with either the same ruling which would then go up on appeal it can or and differen the moment that the order of force medication order is lifted assuming it is confinement changes in this way because of fineman required by the medication or force medication or to that they confinement is very real in this case it's not some sort of abstract confinement the confinement is if you mr beam failed to comply we're going to confine you to agree we're going to bring him however many people that's needed and inject you that's certainly counts as confinement i believe counsel to go into china argument that any state prisoner who is subject to know but interestingly your honor i have looked very far and wide for the circuit court cases and district court cases for that matter which actually confront the issue before this court whether younger of lies and specifically more more specifically whether we need an extraordinary circumstance exceptions younger i have not found any court to actually be in a reasoned manner may be a viable alternative but the ruling here is that we may not bring it as a devious man well as that may quite i mean i understand them my question is why don't you bring white can bring this is claiming that his that his for further proceedings that the criminal proceeding should  if you were to prevail on the merits before the district court on the zel you process claim in my discussions with the state the the state could just  over of the self hearing to determine you know to correct whatever errors were there and i think that's correct judge then they could they could see i had as they know they could see another in their i thought you were looking just at the exception i'm sorry under that was the a i thought your whole argument here was the exception to younger that's correct the exception to younger is that it of our it is that our rights are due process rights which we believe were violated by the entry of that were and of course by the consequences the daily injections cannot be believed indicated absent review under young  certainly not inconsistent with the position that the state complied with the fall or do you just have an objection with the fact that the fall order is in place we have an objection  judge i'm not sure and i would have to look at the brief but i guess what i would ask the court is whether i might submit a letter supplement a letter to the point of the brief the reason why i may not have made it in the brief is because the issue here actually is qu we can look at it ok thank you thank you counsel we appreciate your arguments in this interesting case the matter submitted this time thank you very much