Attorneys for respondents, or defendants to go back into courts and say, listen, i got the wrong advice, and now as a result of this advice, im now facing removal from the country. I now have deportation. There were for whatever reason the argument was essentially was that any immigration consequence was collateral to the point of the actual criminal case, and the Supreme Court held in padilla that immigration consequences werent collateral, theres so significant in nature that in fact they are connected enough to the penalty that the sixth amendment does apply, you have the right too effective counsel and that effective counsel includes competent professional advice on your immigration consequences in the context of a plea. So, that was the gist of it. They applied the she Supreme Court said yes and now were going to apply strickland v washington, the traditionallal ineffective assistance of counsel analysis conducted mostly in criminal cases. This is a really big deal no question abo