John Hawkinson

Or as the Government puts it in their explanation to Judge Saris:

United States District Court District of Massachusetts Notice of Electronic Filing The following transaction was entered by Ross, Erica on 3/6/2026 at 4:36 PM EST and filed on 3/6/2026 Case Name: Lopez Belloza v. Hyde et al Case Number: 1:25-cv-13499-RGS Filer: Any Lucia Lopez Belloza WARNING: CASE CLOSED on 03/06/2026 Document Number: 61 Docket Text: NOTICE OF APPEAL as to [60] Order Dismissing Case, [37] Order on Motion for Sanctions, Order on Motion for Order, [59] Order on Motion to Dismiss,,,,,,,,,,,, [55] Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief, [42] Order, by Any Lucia Lopez Belloza. Filing fee: $ 605, receipt number AMADC-11595096 Fee Status: Not Exempt. NOTICE TO COUNSEL: A Transcript Report/Order Form, which can be downloaded from the First Circuit Court of Appeals web site at http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov MUST be completed and submitted to the Court of Appeals. Counsel shall register for a First Circuit CM/ECF Appellate Filer Account at http://pacer.psc.uscourts.gov/cmecf. Counsel shall also review the First Circuit requirements for electronic filing by visiting the CM/ECF Information section at http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cmecf. US District Court Clerk to deliver official record to Court of Appeals by 3/26/2026. (Ross, Erica)

Any Lopez Belloza, the Babston student deported over Thanksgiving and with her habeas denied today, filed her Notice of Appeal just now:

A. Factual Background 3. The ICE officer responsible for implementing the order says that he believed that it did not B. Procedural History I. Jurisdiction and Venue Are Proper in the District of Massachusetts. A. The Unknown-Custodian Rule Applies. B. Independent of the Unknown-Custodian Exception, the Petition Names Any's II. Section 1252(g) Is Not at Issue.

Here are the highlights of their MTD opposition from my crude table-of-contents generator which tries (successfully; no AI involved!) to pull out the section headings:

Any Lopez Belloza, the Babson student deported to Honduras by ICE over Thanksgiving (in violation of a court's do-not-remove-from-the-US order) when she tried to surprise visit her parents, loses her district court case.
But her case is now ripe for appeal to the First Circuit.

This comes on the heels of the opposition to the motion to dismiss filed last night, where Any's lawyers argued strongly for reconsideration of RGS's prior decision. But they also asked him to dismiss it quickly if he was so-inclined, so they could appeal:

Judge Stearns dismisses Any Lopez Belloza's habeas pt: "The sad truth is that when Any declined the flight she also waived this court's only remaining basis for jurisdiction. Any civil contempt dissolved when the government complied with the facilitation order. The petition thus must be dismissed."

As relevant to Guerrero Orellana in Mass., Sunshine Sykes' APA vacatur is administratively stayed outside C.D. Cal. by the 9th Circuit (as of 12:21pm Eastern today), so as of now Matter of Hurtado is still a thing in D.Mass, putting the ball back in Judge Saris's court as to APA vacatur.

I think?

It's also possible that the floor plan is notional or maybe a backup plan? Like someone told an architect, "plan a standard science mix XYZ and meet these quantum requirements" and the non-quantum stuff is just placeholder.

Esp. since there's no requirement for public review at this (or any) stage.

I asked MIT and they said, "As the lab will be interdisciplinary, the quantum computing work will extend to life science applications!"

That answer still leaves me confused, though.

Is that your way of saying you watched depositions instead?

Yes, I agree it seems peculiar.

We go from Quantum Computing to AI where it is revealed that the CHC minutes are now using AI to summarize the meeting (Microsoft Copilot).

Weirdly it seems to have proper noun typos.

Charlie tells a story about being in grad school at Harvard in 1967–68 and schlepping punch cards to MIT to process on a mainframe (in Bldg 39, I think) and then schlepping them and the results back. By bicycle.

By vote of 7-0, the CHC finds the existing MIT Bldg 39 not preferably preserved in light of the proposed replacement, with details delegated to the staff.

LL, PP, YZ, GK, KS, CH, SK in favor.

No hands from the public, neither comments nor questions.
Not much discussion either.
CH: "How 'bout a motion?"

Actually, on review, there are tissue culture / bio prep on 5th and 4th floors as well as the 2nd floor. So I suppose it has something to do with the quantum computers. (I dunno.)

And we have…zero public comment.

We're about to hit questions from the public.

Yeah, I still don't know.

Of course, it may also be supporting a function in Bldg 38 across the bridge to the the plan right. Not that there's much bio in 38 right now (but…future program changes?)

The director of MIT's quantum initiative "insists" there be ice cream vending machines in the first floor to draw people in, the HGA architect (Samir Srouji) says.

That doesn't quite satisfy LL's question about how people know they can come in.

I mean, clearly there's biological work going on in the building. *shrug*
The CHC's purview does not extend to use.
MIT can put whatever it wants inside its buildings.

I sure hope there's more than 2 quantum computers in the building.

In response to staff concerns about penthouse height, they've already reduced the penthouse by 2 feet.

They need every inch, they say.

Huh. "And that is our presentation."

Here's an AI-generated (so they say) night shot:

Almost all the glass is frosted, except for the pictureframe of view glass showing the quantum computer pane.

(They're also moving the electrical switchgear to the penthouse for resilience. I'm not sure how that works since there's an entire pair of 13.8 kV loops that run through all the building basements, so…I dunno. I guess you can insulate the 13.8kV lines against flood intrusion, even if they stay)

There's also a new penthouse, in addition to the new facade that is intended to be much more energy efficient than the previous, which had…substantial thermal bridging.

(The words "stretch code" accompanied that slide where the building looks like it's "stretching." har har)

MIT wants to get rid of the double-driveway approach and fill it in with a public lobby w/ exhibitions/outreach.

Also a lot of words about the use of the building for quantum computing.

Old, new:

As expected, the CHC finds MIT Bldg. 39 significant without meaningful discussion. We almost skipped public comment on that question — ha! and no hands were raised from the public now that direction is clear.
7-0 (LL, PP, YZ, GK, KS, CH, SK in favor)

On to MIT's proposed replacement.

OK, MIT Bldg. 39 is up at the CHC.
(All the prior cases were approved, although some of 17 Berkeley was severed for future consideration, specifically the trellis.)

The #cambma Historic Commission's hearing on the demolition of MIT Bldg. 39 is up next, starting sometime in the 9 o'clock hour after Thorndike St. finishes: