Legal Opinion
Scalise v. Meese
District Court, N.D. Illinois
Decided June 3, 1988No. 87 C 7898PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
BRIAN BARNETT DUFF, District Judge.
Plaintiffs Joseph Scalise and Arthur Rachel are in a jail in a land far, far away. They want to come home. The Attorney General of the United States has the power to grant their wish, but he refuses to exercise it. Plaintiffs seek a writ of mandamus ordering the Attorney General to establish regulations which would govern the grant or denial of their request, as well as an order finding the Attorney General’s refusal a violation of their due process rights. They have moved for summary judgment on their complaint. This court has jurisdiction…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Cleveland Board of Education v. LoudermillSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Olim v. WakinekonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Haig v. AgeeSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Albert H. Carter v. Robert Seamans, Jr., as Secretary of the Air ForceCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1969
- John Stanley Campbell v. H.G. MillerCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1986
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Jerome J. Scalise v. Richard ThornburghCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1989
- Rosebud Sioux Tribe v. US, BUR. OF INDIAN AFF.District Court, D. South Dakota · 1989