IN RE: Lucas Daniel REGAN (2020)

ON PETITION

ORDER

Lucas Daniel Regan, I, files a submission received December 8, 2020 stating that the “one and only supreme law of [his] religion has which is as follows ․ DO WHAT YOU WANT,” Pet. at 4, and appears to argue that operation of the Supremacy Clause and the First Amendment prohibit laws that impinge on his religious exercise. We regard the submission as seeking mandamus relief.

We must first address our jurisdiction to consider Rev. Regan's submission. See PIN/NIP, Inc. v. Platte Chem. Co., 304 F.3d 1235, 1241 (Fed. Cir. 2002). This is a court of limited subject matter jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1295. Rev. Regan does not identify any decision from which he appeals or petitions for review, much less a decision within the confines of section 1295.

The All Writs Act provides that the federal courts “may issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law.” 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a). As that statute makes clear, however, the Act is not itself a grant of jurisdiction. See Clinton v. Goldsmith, 526 U.S. 529, 534–35, 119 S.Ct. 1538, 143 L.Ed.2d 720 (1999). It confines issuing such relief only in cases that would fall within this court's limited jurisdiction if a proper appeal had been perfected. Because Rev. Regan identifies no such case, we must also deny any mandamus relief.

Accordingly,

It Is Ordered That:

The petition is dismissed.

Per Curiam.