U.S. News

2431 readers

26 users here now

News about and pertaining to the United States and its people.

Please read what's functionally the mission statement before posting for the first time. We have a narrower definition of news than you might be accustomed to.

Guidelines for submissions:

Post the original source of information as the link.
If there is any Nazi imagery in the linked story, mark your post NSFW.
Advocating violence is not allowed on Beehaw in general.
If there is a paywall, provide an archive link in the body.
Post using the original headline; edits for clarity (as in providing crucial info a clickbait hed omits) are fine.
Social media is not a news source.

For World News, see the News community.

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

alyaza@beehaw.org

rs5th@beehaw.org

Powderhorn@beehaw.org

US supreme court limits judges’ power on nationwide injunctions in apparent win for Trump (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 4 days ago by Powderhorn@beehaw.org to c/usnews@beehaw.org

6 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The US supreme court has supported Donald Trump’s attempt to limit district judges’ power to block his orders on a nationwide basis, in an emergency appeal related to the birthright citizenship case but with wide implications for the executive branch’s power. The court’s opinion on the constitutionality of whether some American-born children can be deprived of citizenship remains undecided and the fate of the US president’s order to overturn birthright citizenship rights was left unclear.

The decision on Friday morning, however, decided six votes to three by the nine-member supreme court bench, sides with the Trump administration in a historic case that boosts tested presidential power and judicial oversight in the second Trump administration.

The court’s ruling in Trump v CASA, Inc will boost Trump’s potential to enforce citizenship restrictions, in this and other cases in future, in states where courts had not specifically blocked them, creating a chaotic patchwork.

Democracy sure was fun while it lasted.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] remington@beehaw.org 2 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Democracy sure was fun while it lasted.

Why do you say that? You believe that this one ruling has dissolved all democracy in the USA? If so, then please explain.

[–] Powderhorn@beehaw.org 5 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Citizens United did that. I'm just pointing out this is another sign that we cannot rely on the rule of law, nor constitutional protections.

[–] remington@beehaw.org 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

...we cannot rely on the rule of law, nor constitutional protections.

Come again? Most of us are relying on these things.

If you are saying that there is no 100% guarantee, then of course I agree.

[–] Powderhorn@beehaw.org 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

The Roberts court has consistently chipped away at fundamental rights that we take for granted. (see also: Dobbs)

Nationwide injunctions have been key to holding back the worst impulses of the junta, and now that's also off the table. Reliance on both is all well and good, but it doesn't match the reality of not knowing what rights we'll lose each SCOTUS term.

The only part of the Constitution that's guaranteed to last through this is the Second Amendment. The Fourth is out the window, and the 14th is looking shaky. Articles I and II are being ignored.

[–] remington@beehaw.org 5 points 3 days ago

"The rule of law is not a given in this Nation, nor any other. It is a precept of our democracy that will endure only if those brave enough in every branch fight for its survival. Today, the Court abdicates its vital role in that effort."

Justice Sotomayor, dissenting

It will be left up to us (the people) as it always has.

load more comments (1 replies)