ORAL ARGUMENTS

Oral Arguments are now scheduled for Feb. 5, 2009 in Washington D.C., and will focus on the central question at issue in this appeal:

Does the political question doctrine bar the District Court from determining Appellant's legal rights under United States statutes and the Constitution as a result of the undisputable fact that under Article 23(a) of the San Francisco Peace Treaty (SFPT) of April 28, 1952, the United States is "the principal occupying Power" of Taiwan, over which Japan renounced "all right, title and claim" in Article 2(b)?

Relevant excerpts from the Briefs filed by the Appellants on Nov. 3 and Dec. 17, 2008, are available at Excerpts from Lin v. USA Briefs (.doc)

Note 1: The United States' status as "principal occupying Power" of Taiwan has resulted from the World War II defeat of Japan by the United States, including the United States' conquest of Taiwan, and subsequent United States military government jurisdiction over Taiwan, which is further corroborated by SFPT Article 4(b) confirming the validity of United States Military Government directives pertaining to Taiwan. Note 2: The form of administration by which an occupying power exercises government authority over occupied territory is called "military government." For a territorial cession in a peace treaty after war, the military government of the (principal) occupying power does not end with the coming into force of the peace treaty, but continues until legally supplanted by a recognized civil government for the area. See -- Areas Conquered by US military forces and therefore under USMG jurisdiction, with later "new disposition" by peace treaty

---

A Summary of the fundamental legal rationale for the court case, and the Relief Requested, is given here --
Summary & Relief Requested



The Plaintiffs/Appellants first set of Discovery Requests to the United States government were previously filed in June 2007, and will be amended, updated, and refiled if the current appeal process in the US Court of Appeals is successful.