Part: 123456789         Session: 1         Page na123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495050a51525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390391392393394395396397398399400401402403404405406407408409410411412413414415416417418419420421422423424425426427428429430431432433434435436437438439440441442443444445446447448449450451452453454455456457458459460462463464465466467468469470471472473474475476477478479480481482483484485486487488489490491492493494495496497498499500501502503504505506507508509510511512513514515516517518519520521522523524525526527528529530531532533534536537538539540541542 of 542

Now we have this case in which the Circuit Court has said that the evidence does not sustain the conclusion. Moreover, there are slight differences between the decisions even among the courts that have sustained us in the past.” There was one other case which some years ago had gone against the Department and in which there had been an opinion written which had had the effect of preventing deportation of that particular individual, but had never been thought of as a leading case. At least, it had never been used as a leading case by the Department. So Reilly said, “What we ought to do is ask for a writ of certiorari.”

We discussed whether it was better to do that or to rest on this case. Well, we couldn't rest on this case as defining the law because the judge hadn't defined the law. He hadn't written a conclusive opinion, but had remanded the case. I then said, “Before we make any decision let's for heaven's saks get the Attorney General on this.”

So Reilly and Shoemaker went over to see the Attorney General. There were several days of conversation back and forth, looking at the records and other cases, before the Attorney General said that he thought the proper thing to do was to ask for a writ of certorari, whereupon we wrot the appropriate letter dated April 16, 1938, from the