@scotusleaker.bsky.social
Hilarious how Gorsuch finds his opposition to nationwide injunctions again when a republican is in the white house after consistently upholding them during the Biden era.
Justice Gorsuch concurs but adds that he would resolve, right now, whether courts can EVER issue nationwide injunctions. (He thinks not.) Justice Jackson dissents. s3.documentcloud.org/documents/25...
![SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 24A653
JAMES R. MCHENRY, III, ACTING ATTORNEY
GENERAL, ET AL. v. TEXAS TOP COP SHOP,
INCORPORATED, ET AL.
ON APPLICATION FOR STAY
[January 23, 2025]
JUSTICE JACKSON, dissenting from the grant of stay.
However likely the Government’s success on the merits
may be, in my view, emergency relief is not appropriate because the applicant has failed to demonstrate sufficient exigency to justify our intervention. See Labrador v. Poe, 601
U. S. ___, ___ (2024) (JACKSON, J., dissenting from grant of
stay) (slip op., at 1). I see no need for this Court to step in
now for at least two reasons. First, the Fifth Circuit has
expedited its consideration of the Government’s appeal.
Second, the Government deferred implementation on its
own accord—setting an enforcement date of nearly four
years after Congress enacted the law—despite the fact that
the harms it now says warrant our involvement were likely
to occur during that period. The Government has provided
no indication that injury of a more serious or significant nature would result if the Act’s implementation is further delayed while the litigation proceeds in the lower courts. I
would therefore deny the application and permit the appellate process to run its course.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:6h7b2i6ttw3l4t7pvbvxdith/bafkreiaoxrvzpovodlbp7rhttlmku2p3dfcmfzgbius4lljqyqmhzoiniq@jpeg)
January 23, 2025 at 6:54 PM
Hilarious how Gorsuch finds his opposition to nationwide injunctions again when a republican is in the white house after consistently upholding them during the Biden era.
Yglesias would sign off on rampant homophobia post bush re-election with this same logic.
It turns out that there are lots of voters who do not agree with major elements of the progressive platform.
They care more about cheap energy than about climate change, they have non-cosmopolitan values about immigration, they have traditional views about gender, whatever it is they disagree.
They care more about cheap energy than about climate change, they have non-cosmopolitan values about immigration, they have traditional views about gender, whatever it is they disagree.
January 22, 2025 at 1:26 PM
Yglesias would sign off on rampant homophobia post bush re-election with this same logic.
Mark, do we really need to remind everyone what happened when journalists and legal scholars thought the Muslim ban was unconstitutional?
January 21, 2025 at 7:40 PM
Mark, do we really need to remind everyone what happened when journalists and legal scholars thought the Muslim ban was unconstitutional?
They won’t do anything?
So if I’m understanding this correctly, millions of teenagers suddenly have a bunch of extra time on their hands and also passionately hate the government? This will turn out well
January 19, 2025 at 5:29 AM
They won’t do anything?
It will be illegal to commit crimes
WHITEHOUSE: Under what circumstances will you prosecute journalists for what they write?
BONDI: Only if anyone commits a crime
BONDI: Only if anyone commits a crime
January 15, 2025 at 3:56 PM
It will be illegal to commit crimes