Form 1-94 (arrival/departure record) and Form I-668B (employment authorization card). The I-94 will establish that Wang is lawfully present in the United States, and the I-668B will allow him to work.
The government is strongly opposed to what it characterizes I as an "end run around normal immigration procedures." At the hearing, the government's counsel also contended that Wang cannot now argue that this Court has jurisdiction to order the issuance of immigration papers, because Wang has already argued successfully, both to this Court and to the Court of Appeals, that this case does not fall within the jurisdiction of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the "INA").
The government is correct that this case does not fall under the jurisdiction of the INA. Rather, the Ninth Circuit affirmed that this Court has jurisdiction over Wang's constitutional claims pursuant to both 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and the Court's inherent supervisory power to protect government witnesses. Wang v. Reno, 81 F.3d at 820.
The government errs, however, by arguing that the absence of INA jurisdiction prevents the Court from ordering the issuance of immigration documentation. The Court's inherent power to act as a court of equity, as it did in issuing the permanent injunction in this case, also provides the basis for the relief here sought by Wang.
"Where, as here, the equitable jurisdiction of the court has properly been invoked for injunctive purposes, the court has the power to decide all relevant matters in dispute and to award complete relief.. . ." Porter v. Warner Holding Co., 328 U.S. 395, 399, 90 L. Ed. 1332, 66 S. Ct. 1086 (1946) (emphasis added). The power to award complete relief includes the power to award "'ancillary relief necessary to accomplish complete justice.'" Reebok Int'l. Ltd. v. Marnatech Enter., Inc., 970 F.2d 552, 560 (9th Cir. 1992) (quoting FTC v. H.N. Singer, Inc., 668 F.2d 1107, 1113 (9th Cir. 1982)).
Lester v. Parker, 235 F.2d 787 (9th Cir. 1956) (per curiam), is closely analogous to this case. There, the district court had found that certain Coast Guard regulations had denied the plaintiffs, merchant seamen, of their constitutional right "to seek and obtain private employment in one of the common walks of life." Id. at 788. Accordingly, the court had issued an injunction enjoining the defendants, Coast Guard officers, "from interfering with the employment of these plaintiffs, and from declining or refusing to take steps to advise shipping companies and unions that these seamen are entitled to employment." Id. In addition, and pertinent to Wang's situation, the court's injunction "direct[ed] the defendants to issue to these seamen documents showing they may be employed." Id. at 789.
On appeal, the defendants argued that the portion of the injunction requiring the issuance of emergency employment documents was unenforceable because it (1) granted mandamus relief beyond the district court's authority, and (2) called for "a validation of documents for emergency service which only the Commandant may grant" and that such relief could not be ordered unless the Commandant were joined as a defendant. Id.
The Ninth Circuit rejected the defendants' arguments and upheld the district court's injunction. In so holding, the Ninth Circuit explained:
The court here has done no more than to follow the recognized power of courts of equity in issuing injunctions, to make those injunctions effective by ancillary provisions, in aid of the injunction, which may require the defendant to do something. . . .