In re J.M., R.M., B.M., and A.F.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing the possibility that ATS suits seeking non-monetary relief may proceed against the Secretary of Defense and the Director of the CIA under the APA's waiver of sovereign immunity
• invoking political question doctrine, in part because the “activities of CIA operatives in Nicaragua and Honduras are perforce even less judicially discoverable than the level of participation by U.S. military personnel in hostilities in El Salvador”
• opting “not to resort to [the political question] doctrine for most of [plaintiffs’ claims]” because there were “other bases for dismissing the suit . . . which do not expand [the court’s] jurisdiction by resolving the assertedly political question on its merits”
• “If the Government declines [prosecution] … the Court will appoint another attorney to prosecute the contempt.” (cleaned up)
• declaratory judgment “where federal officers are defendants” is “the practical || equivalent of specific relief such as injunction or mandamus, since it must be presumed || that federal officers will adhere to the law as declared by the court”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).