Williams v. Johnson, 824 F.3d 814 (9th Cir. 2016 (reversed)

The state court of appeal held that the trial court judge correctly ruled by excusing a single juror who explicitly said he would not follow the law.  A perfectly correct decision but not in the 9th Circuit who reversed the state court on habeas corpus.  Naturally, the Supreme Court reversed the 9th Circuit for not following Supreme Court precedent and ignoring AEDPA. The Supreme Court remanded the case to the 9th Circuit (again) who upheld the California court this time. Yet even one of the judges (as a usual dissent by Judge .Reinhardt) still dissented..

What is the trial court supposed to do when a juror refuses to follow the law? Eleven jurors had found the defendant guilty, and the dissent wants to retry the case because one juror held out for refusing to follow the law.  When will the Supreme Court strip the 9th Circuit of habeas jurisdiction?

Immigration” Budiono v. Lynch, 2016 WL 5112030

Once again the 9th Circuit ignores the IJ and BIA and concludes the evidence does not support an order of removal.The panel orders the case reheard for an alien who has been in this country for eight years litigating his removal after not complying with the entrance act for asylum. The dissent writes about safety in this country and alien’s non compliance with the law. Why does the 9th Circuit want these people in this country?