General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFour Republican members of the Supreme Court just said that Trump can ignore the law
It's hard to find a clearer statute than the one Trump is violating.
IAN MILLHISER
DEC 21, 2018, 3:52 PM
On Friday, the Supreme Court denied the Trump administrations request to reinstate an unlawful effort to prevent many refugees from seeking asylum in the United States. This order is not surprising, as the Trump administrations arguments are so weak that they literally were rejected by the judge who wrote infamous Bush era memos authorizing torture.
What is surprising about Fridays order in Trump v. East Bay Sanctuary Covenant is the vote. The decision was 5-4, with Chief Justice John Roberts joining the four Democrats in the majority. All four of the remaining Republicans, including Brett Kavanaugh, voted to grant the stay.
Since joining the Court, Kavanaugh staked out more moderate positions in a handful of cases than his performance during his confirmation hearing suggested. After Kavanaugh was credibly accused of attempting to rape psychology professor Christine Blasey Ford while both he and Ford were in high school, Kavanaugh delivered an angry rant to the Senate Judiciary Committee where he appeared to threaten revenge on Democratic senators.
What goes around comes around, the Supreme Court nominee told senators.
https://thinkprogress.org/four-republican-members-of-the-supreme-court-just-said-that-trump-can-ignore-the-law-f8d6ac3e89ce/
You and Gorsuch shouldn't even be on the bench Kavanaugh..................that's the bottom line and you both should be annulled........................
triron
(22,020 posts)Unfortunately different than sporting events. Our system allows a criminal guilty of high crimes to be POTUS.
Why?
turbinetree
(24,720 posts)turning a blind eye.........................11 days and counting to end this crap............... .
Ms. Toad
(34,087 posts)There is a lower court order (against Trump's policies) that is being appealed to the intermediate court (not even to the Supreme Court).
All the Supreme Court ruled on was whether the lower court decision (which has not yet been ruled on by any appellate level court) would take effect immediately, or wait until after review by one or more higher courts.
This is a legal question that comes up frequently when a decision is expected to be appealed - but a decision has to be made during the appellate period as to what law applies. A vote to preserve the status quo (pre-decision) typically means the higher court believes (based on the limited informaiton in the request for a stay) that the lower court got it wrong.
So it isn't a vote that Trump is free to ignore the law, it is more of a vote on what they believe the law is..