oh stretch hamilton judge back on air i'm here ab after the argument we'll have to discuss the conference and where it will be held nine yeah i so i'm having trouble figuring out that because of the out of the of the waiver of and admissibility in the grant of the uses of being sexist and figuring out whether in the if we take your point of view of the case it's better to think of this as a situation in which  of relief are simultaneously sought so should we think about that is that your position that the granting of the waiver of inadmissibility essentially makes him not removeable as a legal matter our sorry admitted temporarily as a nonimmigrant so is that what you're arguing should be the result of that that it would be sort of like a temporary status because that provision also explicitly gives the judge the authority to condition it appoint certain things and here it could be conditioned on obtaining the uses that are my misunderstanding with that kind of temporary nonimmigrant status would be the use to this visit so that actually anon you truly wanted to take him off the road you would have taken that route h s and in the department of justice works for the president right correct everybody's part of the article to executive branch and the attorney general in the department of homeland security secretary both serve at the pleasure of the government and those secretaries or those or the people who work for them are both each making each other's job and so what we've got here is a situation in which the result of the particularized structures set up by regulations and statutes as they are being applied for man is waiting for the other human to drop we don't know what the next missive out of any of the agencies will possibly necessary for the othe can be opened reopened and move to terminate that you know you said that he can pursue a you even if he is removed from the country if he were like failing to cooperate should the perpetrators of the womb that he suffered be captured and prosecuted then what should we do start a whole new removal proceedings why can't the immigration judge at least rely on the existing removal that there's no longer a basis to waive just for the purpose of getting to you i mean if if this court decision l d g set up this whole situation where immigration judges have to do but they have really well and  the council l b j is on the books so we just have to accept that and i mean it it kind of boils down to if your position is truly ought not be removed was the application is pending there seems to be wide agreement amongst everyone anything i don't see why court at this point because the court cannot really fashion any remedy that really gets advances this petitioners interest if the court early on the case in question pleas an emergency stay order for my client was in the process of being deported to actually get the airport waiting for a flight back to his own country when the court's order absence counsel i'm just trying to figure out where the boy gets the legal authority and i can see why as a practical matter your option one is attractive i just can't i just struggling to figure out where the board has the legal authority to do what you're saying and what the legal effect of such an stay well it's a case of course will be taken under advisement and