Court Opinion

ID: 9461994
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 22:29:25.070928+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:37:21.126093
License: Public Domain

MESKILL, Circuit Judge
(concurring):
I agree with the majority that the district court lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate the claims of Huss and Smilow. I take issue with and disassociate myself from the sentiments expressed in the majority opinion at footnote 16. I am not “disturbed” that the Bureau of Prisons and the Justice Department felt it unwise to cure a jurisdictional defect caused by the defendants.
As the majority points out, Majority Opinion at 606, “[F]or these defendants, represented by able counsel, there are appropriate remedies which they have *607thus far chosen to disregard.” Representatives of the government should strive at all times to see that justice is done. That is what government is all about. Justice does not require, however, that the government waive service-of process upon a proper respondent in order to turn a motion in a criminal case into a civil mandamus or habeas corpus proceeding. Justice certainly does not require that the government, in an adversary proceeding, cooperate with an adverse party to place a particular issue before a particular court at a particular time.