q1 “we discover no basis for conferring standing upon the relatives of an alien to intervene in pending deportation proceedings.”2 citing cases
- Movimiento Democracia, Inc. v. Chertoff, 417 F. Supp. 2d 1350 (S.D. Fla. 2006).published(holding that there is “neither statutory nor deci-sional authority” to confer standing “upon the relatives of an alien to intervene in pending deportation proceedings)
- Lenin Enciso-Cardozo v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 504 F.2d 1252 (2d Cir. 1974).published
At page 917 cited at this page2 citing cases
- Douglas Escobar Mazariegos v. Merrick Garland, No. 20-72948 (9th Cir. Feb. 9, 2023).unpublishedAgosto v. Boyd, 443 F.2d 917, 917 (9th Cir. 1971) (per curiam).
- Shui King Tam Wong v. Griffin B. Bell, 642 F.2d 359 (9th Cir. 1981).publishedSee Agosto v. Boyd, 443 F.2d 917, 917 (9th Cir. 1971) (per curiam).
At page 920 cited at this page1 citing case
- State v. Mier, 370 A.2d 515 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1977).publishedWithout the actions of government officials the crime would have gone undetected. [443 F. 2d at 920] We find no elements of entrapment or other official misconduct in connection with the police techniques utilized herein which would violat…
v.
John P. BOYD, Etc., Et Al., Defendants-Appellees
The wife and minor children of Vincent Pianetti (also known as Vincent Agosto) appeal from a judgment entered following an order of the district court dismissing their complaint in which appellants sought an order permitting them to intervene in deportation proceedings against Vincent pending before the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service. The court dismissed the complaint on the grounds of want of jurisdiction and of want of standing.
There is neither statutory nor decisional authority permitting district courts to entertain actions by the relatives of aliens to intervene in pending deportation proceedings. We decline to create such jurisdiction. We discover no basis for conferring standing upon the relatives of an alien to intervene in pending deportation proceedings. (See Swartz v. Rogers (1958) 103 U.S.App.D.C. 1, 254 F.2d 338, 339.)
The judgment is affirmed.