Court Opinion

ID: 9445674
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 21:36:22.129145+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:30:22.631859
License: Public Domain

CHAMBERS, Circuit Judge
(concurring) .
I believe that here we have a case where the Congress by legislation could give us jurisdiction. I do not believe that it has. Plaintiff seeks no relief against the United States government. He wants it off of the private hide of gov-*797eminent officials. The basis for this is not in the Constitution per se.
If my associates mean that the district court did not have jurisdiction because of, or in the sense of, no claim being stated under the Constitution or Laws of the United States, I concur. I think that is what they mean.
While we do not here have the matter of collateral attack, I do believe the judgment as rendered, unappealed from, would be valid as against collateral attack. In that sense I think there was “jurisdiction.”
My thoughts herein closely coincide with those expressed in the very fine opinion of Judge Mathes in Bell v. Hood, D.C.S.D.Cal., 71 F.Supp. 813.