A new emergency application in an immigration case provides an important opportunity for Justice Barrett to enforce her skepticism about open-ended "administrative stays."
You’d think that when existing rules allow for a TRO or preliminary injunction, and when the party itself asks for this relief, there would be no need (and no basis) to invent a district court “administrative stay.” But hey, what do I know - I only worked for district court judges for 20-plus years. I guess we just lacked imagination.
Did you ever have a District Court Judge who deliberately didn't decide a matter precisely to prevent a merits decision? That is what is going on here and it is not only at the District Court level; that is exactly what Alito is doing as well.
The corruption is strong in this guy. To think that representing one of the parties in a series of litigation matters against the other party regarding the same topic would not give a reasonable person the appearance of partiality. . . It's time for a mandamus.
It's easy to have the impression that the "conservative" Justices do not care about procedure or precedent, and are just arbitrarily achieving the results that they want. I wonder if J. Barrett will continue to push for procedural propriety or will join her fellow conservative justices in anything-goes, results-oriented judging.
Judge Barker's conduct is indefensible and an abuse of the rule of law and ---in its Nationwide reach---Constitution. What is far more disturbing is Alito's silence. Essentially, he has already decided the issue and is simply looking for a way to get his result into effect without engaging the other members of the Court. Alito evidently thinks that the Court's long standing requirement that there be at least 4 Justices to sustain a lower court stay does not apply to him.
You’d think that when existing rules allow for a TRO or preliminary injunction, and when the party itself asks for this relief, there would be no need (and no basis) to invent a district court “administrative stay.” But hey, what do I know - I only worked for district court judges for 20-plus years. I guess we just lacked imagination.
Did you ever have a District Court Judge who deliberately didn't decide a matter precisely to prevent a merits decision? That is what is going on here and it is not only at the District Court level; that is exactly what Alito is doing as well.
The corruption is strong in this guy. To think that representing one of the parties in a series of litigation matters against the other party regarding the same topic would not give a reasonable person the appearance of partiality. . . It's time for a mandamus.
It's easy to have the impression that the "conservative" Justices do not care about procedure or precedent, and are just arbitrarily achieving the results that they want. I wonder if J. Barrett will continue to push for procedural propriety or will join her fellow conservative justices in anything-goes, results-oriented judging.
Judge Barker's conduct is indefensible and an abuse of the rule of law and ---in its Nationwide reach---Constitution. What is far more disturbing is Alito's silence. Essentially, he has already decided the issue and is simply looking for a way to get his result into effect without engaging the other members of the Court. Alito evidently thinks that the Court's long standing requirement that there be at least 4 Justices to sustain a lower court stay does not apply to him.
seems that the judges are taking a lesson from the djt 'how to stymie the legal system' book.
Thank you for bringing this to our attention and explaining what's going on