A very quick explainer on why Justice Jackson issued an "administrative stay" in the SNAP case late on Friday night, and on what's likely to happen next
It is a great pleasure to see legal minds at work. No, really. In a past life, I had occasion to admire lawyers’ careful use of language. You all just took it a step further.
Clear ain't the first word that comes to a non lawyers mind. . tho no shade on attny vladeck. These convolutions of the so-called law are why many of us agree with shakespeare.
Even if the procedural 'convolutions' are difficult to follow, Prof. Vladek did a fantastic job in explaining Justice Jackson's rationale for ruling as she did.
It's almost a guarantee that the full court would have granted it. Honestly, I'm surprised it took this long to arrive at the Court. On a separate note, I wonder if this kind of "compromise" approach tells us anything about the recently popularized Kagan-Jackson split?
Thank you for so quickly taking the time to explain why Jackson took the action. Thank you , also, for your clearly humanitarian attitude toward the issue.
This is so discouraging, when a decision is made trump always halts the SNAP funds. It’s not like he has ever had to do without. This boob is partying up with the rich crew while the country can’t get food on the table. The Republicans need to go with the ACA to keep insurance affordable. I also think the minimum wage should be $15.00.
I don't know about “average wage”Based on an inflation rate of over 40% since 2010, if someone were earning $15/hr then, they would need to be earning more than $20 an hour now, just to stay even.
He can find millions to pay for his weekly golf trips to his tacky-ass golf motels. But refuses to feed Americans because he thinks it gives him leverage over democrats in a political catastrophe of his own making. The most loathsome sack of shit humanity has to offer. Deplorable.
It is comforting to have Justice Jackson exercise her discretion in the manner she did, given the time constraints. What is disturbing is to know that when the Administration is on the losing end of a case, it files for SC relief, asking for an expedited ruling and the SC majority gives relief without a written decision discussing the equities of the relief requested. Doesn’t the lack of an explanation for the SC’s decisions serve to encourage the administration to appeal every time it loses in the DC and COA?
as i understood Steve Vladeck’s commentary, he was saying that Jackson actually issued a LONGER, MORE DETAILED directive (the stay) than would normally be issued. these are simple directives — like a traffic cop waving a hand or blowing a whistle at a crowded intersection — simple directives to guide the actions of the parties involved, in a fast-moving situation. these simple directives do not require an explanation of the “reasoning” — just as the traffic cop doesn’t need to explain why they are waving one line of cars to proceed ahead of the other.
all the parties are instructed to wait — or given permission to wait — until the case is reviewed by the appeals court. the appeals court judges are the ones who need to explain their reasoning.
I listened to your other post this morning when you said 4 posts this week is quite enough (or something to that effect). And when I saw the SCOTUS stay, I was like OH NO, poor Prof Vladek! and soon enough, got this update in my mailbox that you had written another post.
“I like th’ unlettered clerk, can only cry ‘Amen.’” Thanks for taking the time so late in the day, to explain the dissonance of the news media on this one.
I hope you get some rest this weekend. It must be exhausting to get out all of these newsletters at every new “ emergency”. Thank you for your efforts.
WTAF is perhaps the legal term?
Dang it. I should've done that...
No, it was appropriate if not perfect - from one lawyer to another
As a third lawyer on this string, my preference is WTMFAF.
Not a lawyer but spent many years with them in child welfare court, I heartily concur!!
It is a great pleasure to see legal minds at work. No, really. In a past life, I had occasion to admire lawyers’ careful use of language. You all just took it a step further.
Thank you!
This clear explainer is most appreciated!
Clear ain't the first word that comes to a non lawyers mind. . tho no shade on attny vladeck. These convolutions of the so-called law are why many of us agree with shakespeare.
Although, Shakespeare misinterpreted.....
true … although I was going with the popular understanding of the line.
Even if the procedural 'convolutions' are difficult to follow, Prof. Vladek did a fantastic job in explaining Justice Jackson's rationale for ruling as she did.
Indeed he did/does.
Excellent, as usual. Will be interesting to see how this plays out over the next number of days.
It's almost a guarantee that the full court would have granted it. Honestly, I'm surprised it took this long to arrive at the Court. On a separate note, I wonder if this kind of "compromise" approach tells us anything about the recently popularized Kagan-Jackson split?
thank you for swift analysis, and elucidation. i guess i get it, but bottom line as you suggested, is just plain cruel.
Much appreciated explanation!
Thank you for so quickly taking the time to explain why Jackson took the action. Thank you , also, for your clearly humanitarian attitude toward the issue.
I definitely appreciate your insights!
Appreciated the clarification!
This is so discouraging, when a decision is made trump always halts the SNAP funds. It’s not like he has ever had to do without. This boob is partying up with the rich crew while the country can’t get food on the table. The Republicans need to go with the ACA to keep insurance affordable. I also think the minimum wage should be $15.00.
$15/hr is so 2010
What do you think the average wage should be now?
I don't know about “average wage”Based on an inflation rate of over 40% since 2010, if someone were earning $15/hr then, they would need to be earning more than $20 an hour now, just to stay even.
He can find millions to pay for his weekly golf trips to his tacky-ass golf motels. But refuses to feed Americans because he thinks it gives him leverage over democrats in a political catastrophe of his own making. The most loathsome sack of shit humanity has to offer. Deplorable.
Thank you for the explanation.
It is comforting to have Justice Jackson exercise her discretion in the manner she did, given the time constraints. What is disturbing is to know that when the Administration is on the losing end of a case, it files for SC relief, asking for an expedited ruling and the SC majority gives relief without a written decision discussing the equities of the relief requested. Doesn’t the lack of an explanation for the SC’s decisions serve to encourage the administration to appeal every time it loses in the DC and COA?
I would say yes. I’m still debating if Trump owns a few SC justices. He sure does keep them busy
In my humble and completely non-legal opinion, "Yep".
as i understood Steve Vladeck’s commentary, he was saying that Jackson actually issued a LONGER, MORE DETAILED directive (the stay) than would normally be issued. these are simple directives — like a traffic cop waving a hand or blowing a whistle at a crowded intersection — simple directives to guide the actions of the parties involved, in a fast-moving situation. these simple directives do not require an explanation of the “reasoning” — just as the traffic cop doesn’t need to explain why they are waving one line of cars to proceed ahead of the other.
all the parties are instructed to wait — or given permission to wait — until the case is reviewed by the appeals court. the appeals court judges are the ones who need to explain their reasoning.
I listened to your other post this morning when you said 4 posts this week is quite enough (or something to that effect). And when I saw the SCOTUS stay, I was like OH NO, poor Prof Vladek! and soon enough, got this update in my mailbox that you had written another post.
I jinxed it. :-(
“I like th’ unlettered clerk, can only cry ‘Amen.’” Thanks for taking the time so late in the day, to explain the dissonance of the news media on this one.
Thank you for taking time out of your Friday night to explain this to us!
I hope you get some rest this weekend. It must be exhausting to get out all of these newsletters at every new “ emergency”. Thank you for your efforts.