How many nationwide injunctions against Biden policies were allowed to stand?
Looks like the Supreme Court has another case headed their way...
- Thread starter 76-1
- Start date
Kagan looks like the complete fool here. She's talked her whole career about how these nation wide injunctions are unconstitutional. She did so especially when they were being issued against Biden. Now she changes her tune. Of course.
Sarcasm(?), 'cuz no one in their right mind thought ACB was left of center.
I seem to recall some here happy about the student loan injunction. I am sure more sure some were thrilled at the original mefipristone injunction.
The standard should be permanent harm. Kicking an American out of the country is permanent harm. Keeping them until the Supremes rule isn't.A great example, returning Dred Scott to his "owner" would have been permanent harm, keeping him until ruled would not have been.
Absolute gold. Jackson is the Crockett of SCOTUS.
If you view Trump as dead center...
She’s right of Trump who is indistinguishable from a Clinton Democrat.
Nixon was further left than any Republican today. But yes, Reagan and Goldwater wouldn't stand a chance in the modern GOP.
This was the only way they could get this off their docket without pissing off Trump. If they had ruled on the merits, either Trump would have lost or the constitution would have been declared inconsequential.
The constitutional language is not airtight as you all present it. In fact, an originalist interpretation would lead to the conclusion that anchor babies are not citizens.
Well there hardly were any for one. Kagan was opposed to them all and essentially said nationwide injunctions were unconstitutional. Now ruled the exact opposite since Trump is in office.
This is the first year in a while that a big opinion day wasn’t accompanied by a cacophony of calls to add justices to SCOTUS….to 13…to match the number of districts, of course.
I guess the appetite for that has passed by?
I guess the appetite for that has passed by?
Another W for DJT. Be interesting to know after his term is up if DJT would be interested in being on the S.Ct.
There were 14 in the first 3 years, see below. Can you point me to links where you complained?
Nationwide injunction - Wikipedia
You're talking out of your ass. The two situations aren't remotely comparable. The Dems have nothing at the current situation. Pubs have the WH, Congress, and SCOTUS. Therefore they resulted to running to rogue activist judges in heavily blue states to institute an insurrection against the American people as they didn't accept the results of the last election. All of these rulings are complete BS and will be overturned as I've said forever. They played a bad hand and lost.There were 14 in the first 3 years, see below. Can you point me to links where you complained?
Nationwide injunction - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
The situation is "nationwide injunctions" and your hypocrisy about them. You didn't read the link you were provided, but it wouldn't matter. You wouldn't understand it.
Remaining cases:
www.scotusblog.com
The cases that remain
Friday, June 26, is the Supreme Court’s final day of issuing opinions on the merits docket for the 2024-25 term. The court has six cases left to decide, on topics ranging from the […]
www.scotusblog.com
So dictatorships are fine if a majority approve. Great, remember you think that way
There were 14 in the first 3 years, see below. Can you point me to links where you complained?
Nationwide injunction - Wikipedia
Of course not.
Just like complaints about the Senate filibuster and reconciliation/Byrd rules. The majority hates them.... Until a few years later when they flip to the minority. And then they again find their love of that which they once hated.
I recall the 5th circuit issuing a lot of nationwide injunctions against the Obama admin
Trump has done no such thing. He has obeyed court orders. He even brought back that wife beaten pedophile while he had no constitutional requirement to do so.
Meanwhile, Biden openly violated SCOTUS rulings such as forgiving student loans through executive order when the court said he couldn't.
One of these rogue activist judges in Boston just openly refused to follow a SCOTUS ruling. That's a dictatorship.
Can you imagine him tweeting from the bench during oral arguments, mocking the attorneys?
His opinions.
I actually knew his uncle. He was at fordham with me for a semester. Very good baseball player. Later I helped him with a few small development deals. Was a nice piece of business for him. I’m told he’s very very grateful and his nephew seems like he likes me. So that weighed heavily on my decision.
I don’t know what the other justices will do.
There is little doubt that nationwide injunctions have been TOO easy. However, the solution would be to establish conditions that must be met. Making it virtually impossible comes with its own set of issues.
Six justices signed on to an opinion that treats KBJ’s dissent as silly and infantile. Not a good sign for her influence on the court and says a lot about the respect her colleagues have for her legal reasoning.
