Law No more nationwide injunctions from district judges

[oldshadow]

It's as valid a question as asking if the world is flat. There's no argument, whether textual or historical, that the US has ever distinguished the parent's citizenship when granting it.

Otherwise quite a few of the founding fathers would have not been US citizens.

That you can't see any harms that people will suffer in the meantime is malice.

What?

Slaves were citizens?

Of course its been questioned and can be. I actually think its a good idea to settle it with the Supreme Court.

You still cannot deported US citizens and that includes minors. The government is not deporting US minors its the parents that are deporting them.

The democrats are just mad the anchor baby shit is being fixed as it should be.

 

[CantCucktheTuck]

The democrats are just mad the anchor baby shit is being fixed as it should be.

yup

 

[Rob Battisti]

What's wrong with their quality compared to the average Supreme Court judge?

Their dissents and arguments are consistently filled with misinformation and/or hilariously bad takes.

Sotomayors 100,000 kids hospitalized with Covid and the majority on ventilators being just one example that is particularly egregious.

 

[oldshadow]

The problem with this current ruling, is that Trump is now allowed to deport them until they rule on birthright citizenship. Instead of not allowed to deport them while waiting for that official ruling.

No he is not. Show me where this is happening, its not. He is giving parents the right to take their child with them. That is not going to change even if the Supreme Court rules against Trump.

 

[IDGETKTFO]

 

[Rob Battisti]

I’ll sit down soon and read the full decision, but it doesn’t make a ton of sense to me.

In an instance like this, where the federal government seeks to take citizenship away from a whole group of people en masse, how would anyone outside of the injunction’s scope get relief?

In other words, if the injunction only applies to a limited number of people, the government could consider all other people in this group as non-citizens, and move to deport them. Let’s say the suit that challenges the merits of the EO gets to SCOTUS, and SCOTUS strikes down the EO as unconstitutional.
—How does anyone who has been deported get relief? Are we expecting the government to “facilitate” all of their returns? Are these people expected to find their way back to the US on their own somehow? They certainly can’t sue, as they’ll be outside the US and no court where they are at would have jurisdiction.

Seems like a messy and incomprehensible decision, which I guess is what the Roberts Court is known for.

I haven’t seen enough of the decision to form an opinion

 

[Lead]

I think the better approach would be a higher panel that reviews any order or just prevent judge shopping that’s been happening the past few terms to try to guarantee a favorable initial ruling/ injunction. Congress has to formulate that however so i won’t expect anything soon.

 

[oldshadow]

The republicans did the same thing with Obama and Biden and will stop the republicans doing the same when I democrat is in the white house. The democrats were against it when they were in charge but changed when Trump won.

This fixes it everyone.

 

[avenue94]

What?

Slaves were citizens?

Of course its been questioned and can be. I actually think its a good idea to settle it with the Supreme Court.

You still cannot deported US citizens and that includes minors. The government is not deporting US minors its the parents that are deporting them.

The democrats are just mad the anchor baby shit is being fixed as it should be.

Ex-Slaves were made citizens by the 14th Amendment. If the citizenship of parents mattered for their child's citizenship, the amend would have obviously been written to say so. Otherwise, using Trump's logic, the 14th Amendment wouldn't have made ex slaves citizens because their parents were never citizens.

See how dumb your argument is?

Of course its been questioned and can be. I actually think its a good idea to settle it with the Supreme Court.

It has already been settled in US vs Wong Kim Ark over a century ago, let alone before that.

Again, were the Founding Fathers American citizens, yes or no?

 

[Confucamus]

No he is not. Show me where this is happening, its not. He is giving parents the right to take their child with them. That is not going to change even if the Supreme Court rules against Trump.

This is the context that the left intentionally likes to leave out when crying "They're deporting U.S. citizens! Babies even!!" The parents chose to take the kids. Is the left now mad that families are NOT being separated?

 

[Deorum]

The three liberal judges on the bench are the lowest quality I’ve ever seen and it’s not close

Fuck, Marry, Kill?

 

[Crazy Source]

Fuck, Marry, Kill?

This post is beneath you.

 

[avenue94]

Their dissents and arguments are consistently filled with misinformation and/or hilariously bad takes.

Sotomayors 100,000 kids hospitalized with Covid and the majority on ventilators being just one example that is particularly egregious.

You think a verbal gaffe or her clerks messing up her briefing (these remarks came during oral arguments) are worse than the awful history and logic that other justices routinely insert in their written opinions?

You can't seriously tell me that's a worst comment than a so called originalist claiming that the founding fathers intended for abortion to be illegal but not anti-miscegenation laws.

 

[Limbo Pete]

I’ll sit down soon and read the full decision, but it doesn’t make a ton of sense to me.

In an instance like this, where the federal government seeks to take citizenship away from a whole group of people en masse, how would anyone outside of the injunction’s scope get relief?

In other words, if the injunction only applies to a limited number of people, the government could consider all other people in this group as non-citizens, and move to deport them. Let’s say the suit that challenges the merits of the EO gets to SCOTUS, and SCOTUS strikes down the EO as unconstitutional.
—How does anyone who has been deported get relief? Are we expecting the government to “facilitate” all of their returns? Are these people expected to find their way back to the US on their own somehow? They certainly can’t sue, as they’ll be outside the US and no court where they are at would have jurisdiction.

Seems like a messy and incomprehensible decision, which I guess is what the Roberts Court is known for.

Hyperpartisan reactionaries with no meaningful check on their ability to shape our society from the bench. Its common for authoritarian states to form "legally", and that's because by nature they use power to get more power

 

[Rob Battisti]

You think a verbal gaffe or her clerks messing up her briefing (these remarks came during oral arguments) are worse than the awful history and logic that other justices routinely insert in their written opinions?

You can't seriously tell me that's a worst comment than a so called originalist claiming that the founding fathers intended for abortion to be illegal but not anti-miscegenation laws.

I stand by my opinion that those three are significantly less intelligent than other judges past or present irrespective of political leanings.

 

[BFoe]

There is already a procedure for that. It's called a class action law suit. In this case, and many others, people are taking taking one or two plantiffs to a preferred federal judge and getting a nation wide injunction.

Hey, you actually had a post with some substance! You should try that more often.

I saw Kavanaugh’s suggestion about that, but this is problematic as well. It can take days if not weeks for a judge to declare a group a putative class. Trump was deporting people almost immediately in some cases, which I think now is limited to at least 24 hours advance notice. So again, people could ostensibly be deported long before a judge ever declares them part of a putative class, which raises my same point as to how these people would get relief.

I don’t really think there’s great constitutional basis for this decision as far as I can tell so far. Article 3 grants these courts “judicial power” and doesn’t define or limit what that is, and judges have long been able to block things outside of their district or area of jurisdiction, or even to encompass non-parties, going all the way back to England before the colonies. They’ve also granted relief to individuals who have no actual injury themselves in certain instances.
On top of that, as a practical matter, the use of class action suits doesn’t do anything to hamper the practice of judge/venue shopping.

Further, I think Barrett’s assertion towards Jackson that the latter has concerns of an “imperial POTUS” but is fine with an “imperial court” doesn’t make much sense as we’re dealing with lower courts that can be reversed fully by the next highest court. There’s no real remedy for an imperial POTUS, aside from maybe Congress which not only has a much higher bar but doesn’t mean a whole lot when any bill they pass won’t become law until it’s signed by the guy who is causing the harm for which the lower court lawsuit was filed in the first place.

This is just a rather bizarre decision.

 

[Sinister]

The dates include Obama along with Trump. Parents do have the right to take their child with them if they are deported even if the child is a US citizen. Once the child is 18 they can legally return to the US if they choose.

its majority Trump's first term, and you know that. Obama's deportations are well-documented as NOT having these kinds of "mistakes."

The parents arent being explained any rights, they're being threatened. Disingenuous arguments are disingenuous. They're not being explained to that it's their right to take their child, they are being told they can either take their child or leave their child with ICE, and not being given the ability to speak with Family or attorneys, that's not what I call enforcement of rights. That's statist terrorism, being applauded by people who lost their minds at the mere suggestion that they wear a mask in public

 

[Rob Battisti]

Ouch

 

[Sinister]

How much more @Sinister ?

Next time highlight the "on average" portion of my statement and apply the knowledge I know you have. The Democrats are NOT the party of the most wealthy being as they're not the party of tax cuts and de-regulation to the same degree Republicans are.

 

[BFoe]

I stand by my opinion that those three are significantly less intelligent than other judges past or present irrespective of political leanings.

Intelligent as judged by what exactly? All 3 got unanimous ratings of Well Qualified by the ABA, which is a higher rating than Thomas got.