“Universal injunctions have reached epidemic proportions since the start of the current administration,” the filing says. “Those universal injunctions prohibit a Day 1 Executive Order from being enforced anywhere in the country, as to ‘hundreds of thousands’ of unspecified individuals who are ‘not before the court nor identified by the court.’”
While totally ignoring the fact that reason why there are so many injunctions is Trump keeps ignoring laws and the Constitution. An immediate injunction is entirely appropriate in that case.
Besides, it’s not like the lower court judge issues the injunction and that’s the end of the story. There is still litigation, and everything can get appealed. Limiting the scope of those injunctions will only serve to have Trump selectively ignore the Constitution for states what like what he is doing, which is not how it’s supposed to work at all.
Well yea, that’s exactly what he’s after: Small parts of the country, mainly Federal Circuits that aren’t perceived to be “friendly” will have injunctions while those that grab their ankles for Trump and give him whatever he wants (i.e. the 5th) don’t do an injunction and the states are free to not grant citizenship at will.
Conservatives relied on these national injunctions during the Biden admin just the way liberal groups are now. It’s dangerous to prognosticate with this Supreme Court but nationalwide injunctions have their purpose and I don’t see this changing.
It should also be pointed out that Roberts has expressed dismay already with forum shopping. In 2023(?) he tried to pressure the Northern District of Texas to change its venue rules so parties couldn’t just keep filing in Amarillo. The presiding judge of the ND declined. So this has been an issue on Roberts’s radar for awhile. That may lead to some unforseen changes.
the Trump administration says
While totally ignoring the fact that reason why there are so many injunctions is Trump keeps ignoring laws and the Constitution. An immediate injunction is entirely appropriate in that case.
Besides, it’s not like the lower court judge issues the injunction and that’s the end of the story. There is still litigation, and everything can get appealed. Limiting the scope of those injunctions will only serve to have Trump selectively ignore the Constitution for states what like what he is doing, which is not how it’s supposed to work at all.
Well yea, that’s exactly what he’s after: Small parts of the country, mainly Federal Circuits that aren’t perceived to be “friendly” will have injunctions while those that grab their ankles for Trump and give him whatever he wants (i.e. the 5th) don’t do an injunction and the states are free to not grant citizenship at will.
Conservatives relied on these national injunctions during the Biden admin just the way liberal groups are now. It’s dangerous to prognosticate with this Supreme Court but nationalwide injunctions have their purpose and I don’t see this changing.
It should also be pointed out that Roberts has expressed dismay already with forum shopping. In 2023(?) he tried to pressure the Northern District of Texas to change its venue rules so parties couldn’t just keep filing in Amarillo. The presiding judge of the ND declined. So this has been an issue on Roberts’s radar for awhile. That may lead to some unforseen changes.