i hate politicized decisions too and i feel kind of stupid after slamming donald trump for several weeks for saying don t say that the courts are politicize it. they were tweeting, by the way. very politicized decision and disheartening. when he says we will see you in court his big tweet in all caps, that is the next step here, he is right. as jonathan turley says it throws the supreme court conversation into a fascinating context. 4-4 decision means this ruling by the ninth is the ruling. they can t overturn it on a mark halpern is shaking his head. he is ready. he has nicaraguan lawyers. they did put everybody on due process and took advantage of the sloppiness of the order and
not wore about the one injury or on one person with groups of injury and they come and stop it for the entire country. they did it with obama several times which was maddening for them and they would forum shop in texas. now democrats are going to forum shop in the ninth. and here is the problem. you can kwin in every other circuit but if you find a federal judge that will stop manage something and they implement a national injunction it stops everything. the courts are going to have for the good of the entire judicial system, courts have to figure out a way to remedy this. well, supreme court is supposed to be doing that when you have disputed cases. that is the problem. you won t have the 11th battling the ninth if a judge in the ninth freezes everything immediately. that is one of the problems. you don t have all of the different cases coming out of all of the different circumstances. swing vote could stay the
he went in one of the greatest advantages. this was the legal version of the atlanta falcons winning 28- going into the fourth quarter. i mean it. there is no way that lawyer should have bungled that. i ll say one thing about the opinion. the president does have extraordinary power to control the border but if he proposed saying we are not letting anyone named jones, then you d say, the court has a right to strike that down. exactly. they basically have taken the position that a number of people in different categories have due process rights that aren t that were not correctly dealt with by the nature of the order. they are being overly differential to the white house. clearly the white house counsel has some answering to do. this was a terrible job on their part. my constitutional lawyer was not
you can t discount psychology ever to donald trump and to redraw this would be an administration of defeat. his best case in supreme court is a 4-4 tie and i think he could lose 5-3 or 6-2. he will never lose at the supreme court. on the merits? on the last dollar, i will bet you that this decision by the ninth will get chopped up by at least four members of that court. but four is not enough. i know it s not. i think kennedy could vote. no. this is an outrageous decision. i think he has two choices. i think choice number one is to delay this and wait several weeks and go to the supreme court to an unknown outcome. most likely a 4-4 outcome now. or you can actually, if america
professors always told us bad facts ma make bad law. horrific facts, coupled with horrific politics, makes for horrific law. that s exactly what happened here. a couple of things really quickly. they ignored the ruling law. they just as a matter of course gave the state of washington standings. there s no specific person with a specific injury that is specifically going to be addressed by this action, which usually is how you get standings. the ninth decided not to last night. and, also, you talked about green card holders. they radically extended the rights beyond mere green card holders and did something the supreme court has never done and extended this to potentially claims for possible new claims