case for two independent reasons first determination order below is a person a violation of the lynn rule that an immigration judge cannot terminate proceedings for lack of jurisdiction based on an unreconstructed removal order second relief which is what happened in all cholera but there is no authority for the proposition that the that that section can actually divest an immigration court of already vested and exclusive jurisdiction  over the immigration proceedings now what happens why is that the court is expected this regard or in your view compelled to disregard subsequent events in this case the departure and subsequent attempt to re a judge an immigration judge of that exclusive jurisdiction which is already vested and the old otherwise would be to expand the statute from one which merely bars a properly removed alien from seeking subsequent relief into one which in which an mexico he has no right to come back to the united states he stopped at the border you're saying that he had to be released going to be united states that we could pursue his original proceeding which he had never really pursued to representative the attorney general putting to forty proceedings under on a used to twelve twenty nine where i need to forty and then put in a move proceedings for that for whatever reason they determine that perhaps they don't want to reinstate but restatements probably does pertain to this particular individual and you should do that through fingerprints and third the last i've also forgotten what it was but the impression i had is that there are just this side of ministerial you know the kind of things that that could be done pretty expeditiously if somebody set their mind to doing it he stayed immigration officer who exactly is it that has to make the determination that would trigger the ability to remove the individual suddenly wake up one day and someone's knocking at the door and we have a reinstated order and you're out of here you know he has to come in and be asked back to identify the alley so they have to make sure they have the right alien many names are common so the only way they usually do that is to make the time which pushes counsel pointed out that is the only difference but i submit that that difference is a difference a distinction without really difference because it doesn't affect this court's ability to review the order  have to review it and the majority opinion said we plead guilty to the fact that we're letting the issue go but we cannot exercise jurisdiction outside the scheme that congress has set forth for us and that is it has to be united states and coming back illegally in leagues top of the border he had brought an earlier proceeding that was unrelated to the expedited removal proceedings and and it seems to me that somehow you want to get proceed because here it is useful determination or your referring out of the the order by the immigration judge terminating the proceedings but why should that trump was going on a different track and it may be arguable as to whether it was a wise judgment for the removal order granted the congress is given very limited review of that but why is it the pending existence of a prior proceeding prevents the agency from being able to enforce what clearly they'd be able to do if there had been no prior proceeding or if the person your argument then mr glyn though did not even have to ask for permission to get probation to come back into the country after pleading guilty his father should just gone come back and said i but i just thought this was a jurisdiction you have to let me back in the country or at least you have to hold me and send me to the immigration judge when my hearing this and further the congress has been very clear that in order to break your continuous presence here in america if you are gone for more than ninety days it's presumed that you are continuously present in america for ninety argument is correct he had he had to get into the united states a free card seems a little odd doesn't it kind of sort of strange well i guess the consequences of not holding not the student practitioners teach lawyers in lessons as to how they should do it thank you very much like both counsel will proceed to the next case on springs calendar for argument which is after th