Gorsuch: 1 seems consistent with equitable remedy. 3 seems to be "if its really important do an injunction" Every court thinks these are important, so what is the limit on that?

Feigenbaum: not really my issue

Gorsuch: indulge me.

Feigenbaum: Courts would need to consider alternatives.

Gorsuch: we have told them that, they ignore us, even though they think they don't. What cases in the past gall in 3?

Feigenbaum: DACA case.

Gorsuch: thats the 1st bucket.



Feigenbaum is in a hole he doesn't need to be in. just needs to say 1 and 2 are the only real times these nationwide injunctions would be appropriate.



have to go do my real job now. damn the man.

I know this has nothing to do with the merits of his argument, but Feigenbaum is annoying as hell.

This is pretty long as oral arguments go.

wrong thread

I'm sure the attorneys enjoy this, but the questions and responses are very technical. Hard for a moron like me to follow.

So what happens on May 22?

One of the idiot lib scotus was going crazy about how if Trump is right then each of those people affected are going to have to sue individually

"One by one by one by one"

These are the same morons that want that for illegals

🚨 HOLY CRAP... Liberal Justice Kentaji Brown Jackson declares she wants nationwide injunctions because if not, the executive would no longer have to 'move quickly' to reclaim its Article 2 powers... pic.twitter.com/Q8P5ATRjRN

She is basically saying here that she wants the lower…

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) May 15, 2025

BlackGold said:

---

doubledog said:

---

Childern born here can stay. Illegal immigrant parents have to go home.
All medical bills must be paid by the parents.

A good parent would take the child back home with them.

---

Why do they get to stay here though? I had a sister born in a foreign Asian country that we were not citizens of and they made my parents sign waivers, literally immediately after my mom gave birth, saying my sister was not a citizen of the country. We should be doing the same thing. You'll keep your country for longer doing this.

---

Different countries have different rules.

People can benefit from something in the past knowingly or unknowingly and still know/think it is bad.

People can also change their minds about things.

Margo's thoughts after SCOTUS hearing. Thread.

2/ Justice Kavanaugh (echoed by several other justices) stressed that exigent circumstances purportedly justifying nationwide injunctions don't exist because courts can grant TRO/Preliminary Injunctions for putative classes (meaning class action lawsuits not yet certified).

— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) May 15, 2025

More detail to follow, but I predict CJ Roberts will write an opinion that is VERY narrow and only allows the injunction in the "birthright citizenship" cases to stand, while erecting substantial barriers in pretty much all other instances.

Barrett and the 3 liberals will…

— Shipwreckedcrew (@shipwreckedcrew) May 15, 2025

Full text;

Quote:

---

More detail to follow, but I predict CJ Roberts will write an opinion that is VERY narrow and only allows the injunction in the "birthright citizenship" cases to stand, while erecting substantial barriers in pretty much all other instances.

Barrett and the 3 liberals will join him in the outcome, but not necessarily his reasoning, and they will dissent on the parts of his decision creating barriers.

The conservatives will dissent from the outcome, but their dissents will join the parts of his decision creating the barriers.

They will then use this opinion to "remand for further consideration consistent with this decision" all the other nationwide injunction cases.

The result will be a mis-mash that will prove to be ridiculously mis-applied back in the district and circuit courts.

It is Planned Parenthood v. Casey all over again.

---

This is a long form-version of what I had thought would likely happen; a watered down Roberts opinion giving a convoluted restriction/standards as to nationwide injunctions.

I think anyone claiming insight into what any of the female justices, including ACB will write is just speculating. They have no consistent opinions other than KBJ/Sotomayor/Kagan being loyal to the far left.

Margot Cleveland's take, summarized for what it's worth, is similar;

Now, let's wait to see if they prove all of the SCOTUS prognosticators wrong, yet again.

Part of the legacy of slavery in this country, is the real answer.

will25u said:

---

More detail to follow, but I predict CJ Roberts will write an opinion that is VERY narrow and only allows the injunction in the "birthright citizenship" cases to stand, while erecting substantial barriers in pretty much all other instances.

Barrett and the 3 liberals will…

— Shipwreckedcrew (@shipwreckedcrew) May 15, 2025

---

Is that a more restrained interpretation?

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

torrid said:

---

Press is making a case that Little Marco benefited from birthright citizenship because neither of his parents were citizens when he was born. Correct me if I am wrong, but I would expect as Cuban exiles they had legal, permanent residence.

---

So? No one is saying that birthright citizenship should be retroactively repealed. That would be impossible.

---

That's not the point, no one is saying that. They are trying to make him out to be a hypocrite using the false equivalency of giving citizenship to the child of a legal immigrant and to an illegal immigrant.

I don't know anything about the specifics of the Rubio, but do know there was a process to go through to become a permanent legal resident. So if the Rubio did that before he was born, then he's not an anchor baby.

Well she's not a biologist....

Revealing factoid in SCOTUS argument today - of the 40 nationwide injunctions issued since Trump took office, 35 have come out of just 5 Districts.

I didn’t hear the listed but based on what I’ve read, my guesses are:

DC
NDCalif
Maryland
Massachusetts
WDWash

— Shipwreckedcrew (@shipwreckedcrew) May 16, 2025

Rhode Island has been active.

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

Rhode Island has been active.

---

Has the Hawaii judge done anything this term yet

No need to go that far after Biden stacked the courts last term.

This birthright case is not going to end well for DJT based on what i heard by all the justices.

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

will25u said:

---

More detail to follow, but I predict CJ Roberts will write an opinion that is VERY narrow and only allows the injunction in the "birthright citizenship" cases to stand, while erecting substantial barriers in pretty much all other instances.

Barrett and the 3 liberals will…

— Shipwreckedcrew (@shipwreckedcrew) May 15, 2025

---

Is that a more restrained interpretation?

---

No one knows who will "write" the opinion because that's based on who signs on to the drafted opinions circulated. It could end up being a judgment rather than an opinion (if possible in this case) if no more than 4 justices sign on but fewer sign on to a dissent.

For this to be true, 4 other justices will have to sign on to the draft opinions Roberts wrote and I don't think the conservative justices will. I know the leftist ones won't.

Burpelson said:

---

This birthright case is not going to end well for DJT based on what i heard by all the justices.

---

I'm glad birthright citizenship sends a tingle up your leg. Can you tell us why? I suspect it's because you believe and want brown people to move here and have as many kids as possible to be American citizens. Is that correct?

My prediction is that ACB will F this up, as usual.

What a miserable appointment she was. Complete WASTE of a SC appointment just to satisfy putting a woman on the court.

Might be the biggest mistake Trump made in his first term

The estrogen club may stick together, communists and ACB, but there should still be 5 otherwise. It was amazingly unusual in its tone from Kagan-Sotomayor-KBJ, imho, or at least the latter two.

I strive for maximum politeness and charity in all of my tweeting! I agree that the questioning was unusual in its tone. Also unusual was Chief Justice Roberts interrupting Justice Sotomayor and asking her to allow Sauer to answer

— Eric W. (@EWess92) May 15, 2025

I agree with iron horsey;

As I hear it, Kagan was backpedalling from her earlier position.

Then there's Kenji who is absolutely ridiculous but she can't top Sotomayor who all but publicly announced her TDS is how she decides cases.

Dr. Turley sees Roberts and Barrett as the deciders and he's not…

— IronHorsey 🇺🇸 (@IronHorsey2000) May 15, 2025