Reagan Posted January 27, 2020 Report Posted January 27, 2020 This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up Quote
PhatMack19 Posted January 28, 2020 Report Posted January 28, 2020 Maybe more important part of this victory. This could put an end to the judge shopping where one liberal judge can shutdown policy. Gorsuch wrote on that in his concurrence. He lambasted the idea that a single federal judge can write such sweeping injunctions, stating that if current forum shopping continues then federal regulations would essentially have to pass 94-0 through the district courts and then 12-0 on appeal to be implemented. District courts were never designed to have the authority to issue those types of sweeping injunctions that affect more than the specific plaintiffs in front of them Quote: In addition to the 5-4 decision allowing the rule to go into effect, Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch issued a concurring opinion rebuking activist judges and their rush to apply "nationwide injunctions" against Trump administration policies. "Today the Court (rightly) grants a stay, allowing the government to pursue (for now) its policy everywhere save Illinois. But, in light of all that's come before, it would be delusional to think that one stay today suffices to remedy the problem. The real problem here is the increasingly common practice of trial courts ordering relief that transcends the cases before them. Whether framed as injunctions of 'nationwide,' 'universal,' or 'cosmic' scope, these orders share the same basic flawthey direct how the defendant must act toward persons who are not parties to the case," Gorsuch wrote. A big part of this ruling was a statement that district courts are over-reaching in nationwide injunctions, and that the courts are over-reaching their authority in declaring how things should operate Reagan 1 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.