It’s ridiculous that any President (whether he’s from your favorite team or not) has to appease 300+ judges is ridiculous. There will always be biased judges who will only rule to obstruct.
So why didn’t it happen to such extent before?
US Supreme Court limits federal judges' power to block Trump orders
31–40 of 878 posts
Re: US Supreme Court limits federal judges' power to block Trump orders
#32There's no legal reasoning. If there's a D president again, this gets reversed early on. Nationwide injunctions were saught and used by (self-proclaimed) conservatives to slow down and stop Biden immigration policies.
You need to actually read the decision. There's plenty of legal reasoning. You may not agree with it, but your opinion is irrelevant. One thing they didn't talk about was structural: the court system is split up into X circuits, and each circuit is independent. Normally each circuit uses rulings from other circuits as a basis for its judgements, but circuits are pretty independent from each other. The Supremes weigh…
>Why would a lower court have more authority than an appeals court? That makes no sense.
An appellate court considers the decisions of the courts below it, so it makes sense its actions would be restricted to those courts. What makes no sense is the newly possible situation in which an action violates the U.S. Constitution in one district but not another.
Re: US Supreme Court limits federal judges' power to block Trump orders
#33It’s ridiculous that any President (whether he’s from your favorite team or not) has to appease 300+ judges is ridiculous. There will always be biased judges who will only rule to obstruct.
If you don't do a bunch of illegal shit that violates people's rights, you don't end up in court as much. It's not that hard to figure out.
Re: US Supreme Court limits federal judges' power to block Trump orders
#34This is essentially an ad hoc Constitutional Convention being carried out by 6 people, 3 of whom were hand-picked by the sitting president and another of whom is arguably the most corrupt Supreme Court Justice in our history. Nothing is off the table. Anyone who thinks the Constitution can protect them should think again.
Re: US Supreme Court limits federal judges' power to block Trump orders
#35https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a884_8n59.pdf Justice Sotomayor dissents: > Instead, the Government says, it should be able to apply the Citizenship Order (whose legality it does not defend) to everyone except the plaintiffs who filed this lawsuit. If that’s the case, I’m curious if it could be fixed with a class action, so everyone (or everyone born in the US) is a plaintiff? If that’s legally a thing.
>class action What you describe is voting We’re in this mess because people are not interested enough, educated enough, or engaged enough politically to make their position explicit to drive the direction of legislation and executive action. Citizens of The United States have every tool available to to work together to shape their communities. The reality is the overwhelming majority do not do that, and you can come…
I think this often gets confused. Voting a president in doesn't give them a blank mandate to do whatever they want, such as break the law. And knowingly doing things that might not get approved by courts, but veiling it in a "novel legal theory" disguise is still breaking the law. Just because slow and thorough processes need to take place to adjudicate these actions doesn't mean that these actions aren't worth adjudicating. So while voting is important, keeping the voted-in president accountable is important too.
Re: US Supreme Court limits federal judges' power to block Trump orders
#36There's no legal reasoning. If there's a D president again, this gets reversed early on. Nationwide injunctions were saught and used by (self-proclaimed) conservatives to slow down and stop Biden immigration policies.
You need to actually read the decision. There's plenty of legal reasoning. You may not agree with it, but your opinion is irrelevant. One thing they didn't talk about was structural: the court system is split up into X circuits, and each circuit is independent. Normally each circuit uses rulings from other circuits as a basis for its judgements, but circuits are pretty independent from each other. The Supremes weigh…
[deleted]
Re: US Supreme Court limits federal judges' power to block Trump orders
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
They need to do two things: 1. File a suit in every circuit 2. Request an injunction type that's more appropriate Given the number of babies being born every day it shouldn't be hard to do. The thing is, the US doesn't issue citizenship papers. So I suppose they need to apply for an SSN and get denied (since the baby is a non-citizen), which will show immediate harm. It also begs the question: if that baby is illegal…
My understanding is that the administration's position is that at least one of the parents needs to be a citizen or a legal resident. If that's the case the answer to your question is: yes - together with the parents.
And if the parents are on valid non-resident visas? Suddenly the child has no status?
Moreover, there is literally no mechanism to prove that your parents are citizens.
Millions of citizens will be at the whim of whatever racist thug decides to hurt them that day.
Welcome to Fascist America.
Re: US Supreme Court limits federal judges' power to block Trump orders
#38It’s ridiculous that any President (whether he’s from your favorite team or not) has to appease 300+ judges is ridiculous. There will always be biased judges who will only rule to obstruct.
An injunction is not a judgment. It is temporary. A new rule or law is passed. It might be unconstitutional or otherwise not enforceable. Until this can be sorted out sometimes the law/rule is blocked until it is sorted out. Since the law/rule was not in place before the suit it is sometimes ok to temporarily block the rule until it’s legality can be determined. One goes by the principle of causing least harm.
It causes the least harm to block the birthright executive order until it’s legality can be determined. Therefore it should be blocked nationwide.
Re: US Supreme Court limits federal judges' power to block Trump orders
#39It’s ridiculous that any President (whether he’s from your favorite team or not) has to appease 300+ judges is ridiculous. There will always be biased judges who will only rule to obstruct.
If you don't do a bunch of illegal shit that violates people's rights, you don't end up in court as much. It's not that hard to figure out.
And one guy gets to decide what's legal?
Re: US Supreme Court limits federal judges' power to block Trump orders
#40Sounds like you now need to start lawsuits in every state?
> Sounds like you now need to start lawsuits in every state?
Every federal judicial district (that's one per state in smaller states, but more in larger states—California has four.)