Xiao v. Reno
Decision Date | 06 October 1993 |
Docket Number | No. C-90-0350 WHO.,C-90-0350 WHO. |
Citation | 837 F. Supp. 1506 |
Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of California |
Parties | Wang Zong XIAO, Plaintiff, v. Janet RENO, in her capacity as Attorney General of the United States; Michael J. Yamaguchi, in his capacity as United States Attorney for the Northern District of California; Reginald L. Boyd, in his capacity as United States Marshal for the Northern District of California; Chris Sales, in her capacity as Acting Commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service; and David Ilchert, in his capacity as District Director for the Immigration and Naturalization Service, Defendants. |
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
Cedric C. Chao, John D. Danforth, Ruth N. Borenstein, Lisa Bradley, Morrison & Foerster, San Francisco, CA, Paul M. Gordon, Law Offices of Paul M. Gordon, Oakland, CA, for plaintiff.
John A. Mendez, U.S. Atty., Stephen L. Schirle, Chief, Civil Div., Alberto E. Gonzalez, Sp. Asst. U.S. Atty., San Francisco, CA, Mark C. Walters, Asst. Director, Michele Y.F. Sarko, Alexander H. Shapiro, Attys., Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Div., Dept. of Justice, Washington, DC, for defendants.
Berger v. United States,295 U.S. 78, 88, 55 S.Ct. 629, 633, 79 L.Ed. 1314(1935), overruled on other grounds, Stirone v. United States,361 U.S. 212, 80 S.Ct. 270, 4 L.Ed.2d 252(1960).
Plaintiff, Wang Zong Xiao("Wang"), a citizen of the People's Republic of China ("PRC" or "China"), claims he is a victim of a prosecutorial effort conducted in violation of the above canons enunciated by the Supreme Court.Wang filed this lawsuit against the Attorney General of the United States, the United States Attorney for the Northern District of California, the Marshal for the Northern District of California, the Commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service ("INS"), and the INS District Director(collectively "defendants" or "government"), seeking to bar the United States government from returning him to the PRC, where, Wang insists, he faces the death penalty as punishment for providing truthful testimony in an American court of law.The gravamen of Wang's first amended complaint is that the government deprived him of the substantive due process of law that the Constitution of the United States guarantees.
Plaintiff's first amended complaint, filed July 5, 1990, stated twelve causes of action.In accordance with the Ninth Circuit's opinion in Wang ZongXiao v. Barr,979 F.2d 151(9th Cir.1992), this Court, by Memorandum Decision and Order ("Memorandum Decision") filed March 2, 1993, dismissed Wang's eleventh cause of action.Wang's remaining causes of action are for injunctive relief pending final adjudication of asylum application (including federal judicial review), injunctive relief pending final adjudication of asylum application (including federal judicial review), violation of substantive due process, violation of the government's duty to protect its witnesses, breach of the government's duty to exercise ordinary care, equitable estoppel based on affirmative governmental misconduct, violation of 18 U.S.C. § 3508, violation of procedural due process (alleging that § 3508 is unconstitutional as applied to Wang), violation of procedural due process (alleging that § 3508 is unconstitutional as applied to any prisoner from the PRC), violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1182, and violation of the law of nations and international law.
After almost three years of extensive discovery, the Court conducted a thirteen-day trial on Wang's causes of action.The Court hereby sets forth its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, as required by Rule 52(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.To the extent that any Findings of Fact are included under Conclusions of Law, they shall be deemed Findings of Fact; and to the extent that any Conclusions of Law are included under Findings of Fact, they shall be deemed Conclusions of Law.
The facts show such clear, flagrant, and shameful violations of Wang's rights under the Constitution that they"shock the conscience" of the Court and deny Wang the due process to which he is entitled.The facts also warrant the exercise of the Court's inherent supervisory power to protect the witnesses appearing before it.To remedy the constitutional violations, and to protect Wang from certain torture and probable death, the Court enjoins defendants from taking any action to return Wang to the custody of the PRC or its representatives.
For...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 7-day Trial
-
Humphries v. Various Federal USINS Employees
...money damages, asserted by a nonresident alien who is present in this country, against federal government officials. See Xiao v. Reno, 837 F.Supp. 1506 (N.D.Cal.1993); Immigration Law Service § 27:14 (Alan Jacobs ed., Clark Boardman Callaghan Similarly, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, every person ......
-
Hornof v. United States
... ... It refers to the alien's presence at the border ... of the United States, not to her or his subjective wish to ... come here.” Xiao v. Reno , 837 F.Supp. 1506, ... 1562 (N.D. Cal. 1993), (citations omitted), aff'd sub ... nom ... Wang v. Reno , 81 F.3d 808 (9th Cir ... ...
-
Wang v. Reno, 93-17262
... Page 808 ... 81 F.3d 808 ... 96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2570, 96 Daily Journal ... D.A.R. 4282 ... WANG Zong Xiao, Plaintiff-Appellee, ... Janet RENO, in her capacity as Attorney General of the ... United States; Michael J. Yamaguchi, in his capacity as ... United States Attorney for the Northern District of ... California; Reginald L. Boyd, in his capacity as United ... States Marshal for the Northern ... ...
-
In re Extradition Omar Ameen
...inter alia , that the government violated his substantive due process rights under the Fifth Amendment. See Wang Zong Xiao v. Reno , 837 F. Supp. 1506, 1547 (N.D. Cal. 1993). The district court agreed and held that the conduct of the relevant government officials "shocked the conscience" in......
-
ILLIBERAL LAW IN AMERICAN COURTS.
...Trans Chem. Ltd. v. China Nat'l Mach. Imp. & Exp. Corp., 978 F. Supp. 266, 280, 283-84 (S.D. Tex. 1997); Wang Zong Xiao v. Reno, 837 F. Supp. 1506, 1542-43 (N.D. Cal. (80) Donald C. Clarke, Puzzling Observations in Chinese Law: When Is a Riddle Just a Mistake, in UNDERSTANDING CHINA'S L......