Christine Lemmer-Webber
So the US Supreme Court said today that federal judges basically can't temporarily halt the executive branch with injunctions
And.... that takes away one of the few tools we have left against authoritarian actions from Trump. They're moving too fast for nearly any other tool. Which means an executive order can go out one day and... well, I guess it will take a long time for anything to be undone.
Christine Lemmer-Webber
Unfortunately that means the reprieve allowing trans people to update their passports is almost certainly off the table
I'm worried what would happen if eg they signed a bathroom bill one day and started enforcing it the next, sending people who are trying to pee to the wrong prison
![Asta [AMP]](https://gnusocial.jp/theme/gnusocialjp/default-avatar-stream.png){kind=avatar}
Asta [AMP]
@cwebber@social.coop combine this with the ruling on “porn sites” and obscenity and such, and… well, how many states have laws that define our mere existence as obscene? I don’t like where this train of logic ends.
Asta [AMP]
@cwebber@social.coop and when something can be done, they will definitely appeal it all the way to the Supreme Court, who… will absolutely not stop them.
Asta [AMP]
@moira@mastodon.murkworks.net @cwebber@social.coop I am very aware of the difference between legally correct and morally correct; my point regarding the 9th circuit ruling was that the administration's arguments for being unable to "execute laws" is bad. ICE raids have continued, and protests were not certainly not violent. They claim the administration presented proof that ICE was being interfered with, and I both doubt the veracity of those claims as well as the very idea that ICE is acting legally.
Which is to say, they gave deference and assumption that the administration is following the rule of law when almost nothing about what is happening is actually constitutionally legal to begin with. Which is not a great sign for challenges in these regions, really, if they consider people protesting to be "interfering" or a rebellion.
Asta [AMP]
@moira@mastodon.murkworks.net @cwebber@social.coop Well, and I wouldn't expect those rulings to matter much, either; although they've been an effective tool to some degree, the regime seems to have no problem either outright ignoring the orders or simply modifying them in some fashion.
Plus some of the districts are not as liberal as they once were; the ninth circuit of appeals, for instance, is responsible for vacating the stay/restraining order/etc or whatever that a judge had placed against the National Guard federalization in LA.
Solarbird :flag_cascadia:
@aud @cwebber Regarding the 9th Court of Appeals's LA decision; legally right is very different to morally or ethnically right, and the reality is that the Presidency was ceded far too much power across the cold war, and no real efforts were made to reverse it afterwards.
In terms of troop deployment in particular, see LBJ taking the same kind of action in support of civil rights, in Alabama. Troops in LA are in no small part revenge for those acts of good, but either way, if it was legal then, it's probably legal now.
None of this is to take away from the chaos nightmare that SCOTUS's new anti-lawful ruling unleashes, of course. It's not law, it's destruction of law.
But I don't think the 9th's LA ruling is a philosophical shift.
Solarbird :flag_cascadia:
@aud @cwebber As I understand it, they can still issue stay orders, but they'll only be effective in their areas of jurisdiction. This means it'll take multiple suits over every illegal action, and probably getting wins mostly or only in blue states, until and unless cases move higher up.
It's very much a recipe for geographically-based rights, and people in red-state areas more than ever need to move, if they can.
Christine Lemmer-Webber
@astrid Yes that's exactly the thing, it's not the legal output as written, it's what they can get away with based on the legal output
แอท-ทริด
@cwebber i think your read of the s.c. opinion is incomplete but also i think the trump admin knows it doesnt matter anyway...
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.