I'm not sure we're all talking about the same thing... what do you define as Article II courts? A quick Google search tells me that "Article II court" is an uncommon term that occasionally is used to refer to military courts and the United States Court for Berlin. All the other non-article III courts, like the SSA administrative courts, are Article I.
EDIT: Article from the Heritage foundation which is basically the only thing on Article II courts from a reputable source I could find. It doesn't mention SSA judges, but it does say Article II courts are military court martials.
Fair enough, I guess "Article II courts" was a bad term to use.
Call them what you like, the point is they are not Article I or Article III courts. That's why there's a case to "establish an Article I immigration court." The current immigration courts clearly are not Article I courts already, or this case would not exist (and they obviously aren't Article III courts either).
I don't know why they are categorized the way they are, but the only courts considered "Article I courts" are bankruptcy/tax/territory/federal claims courts and military/veterans appeals courts, and the only courts considered "Article III courts" are district, appeals, and supreme courts. Courts that are part of the executive are never referred to as Article I courts or Article III courts by any reputable sources, as far as I know. This is most likely because, as I previously mentioned, they were not set up in the inferior courts clause. They were set up as administrative agencies udner the Necessary and Proper clause.
1. Why should we consider article I courts topical and not article II? It seems like you're just basing this on the DOJ definition, which doesn't mention article I/II/III courts at all-it just gives examples.
First of all, I'm not just basing this on the DOJ. I'm basing this on literally every single definition that I've found (besides Findlaw's, which isn't particularly credible). Cornell's specifically says only I and III are included. The others (including the US courts' website one) list out every single federal court out there, including SCOTUS, circuit courts, district courts, tax courts, bankruptcy courts, veteran appeals court, military appeals court, trade courts, and federal claims courts. Not a single one of them mentions immigration courts, ALJs, or military tribunals.
2. Aren't you undermining T on the SAA program by saying article I courts are topical? ALJ is typically considered article I, though I don't know about SSA courts specifically.
You're right, I just found that out yesterday.
ALJs are actually in a special category. They are Article I judges. However, they are still working for the executive branch, not a federal court. In fact, the SSA website indicates in multiple places that they are separate from the federal court system.
EDIT: What exactly does this plan change? There's no such thing as an "SSA court" as far as I can tell. There are ALJs, which are judges, but not really courts as far as I can tell. Then there are various appeals courts within the SSA. Which does the Aff change?
_________________Check out my new website!
"Never quote yourself on internet forums" - Gabriel Blacklock, 2014