I always love it when students (or lawyers) write absurd "Questions Presented" that are so obviously tilted that they dont' really advance the ball. So how about this one:
"The question presented here is significant: Must an IJ [Immigration Judge] ignore repeated and blatant inconsistencies throughout an alien's hearing testimony and applications, simply because, when viewed individually, each inconsistency actually served to weaken her eligibility for relief?"
Hmmm. I wonder. What side do you think the speaker comes out on this one?
What's funny is that this doesn't come from an advocate's brief; rather, it's the opening salvo in the panel's opinion. Ho ho ho.
If you haven't hit the link yet, take a guess. The panel who penned this "Question Presented" is: (A) Reinhardt, Pregerson, and Hawkins; (B) Nelson, Silverman, and McKeown, or (C) Bybee, Rawlinson, and Wallace.
A toughie, huh? Really tough. Ho ho ho.
Admittedly, tougher to figure out who the actual author is. But, here, it's Judge Bybee.
