SCOTUS
-
The admin should have returned him. As far as I can see there's no reason to deem him a gang member. He was here legally under an asylum claim.
Meh, a lot of the media claims about his perfect behavior are incorrect. The guy has been arrested on multiple occasions and has also been denied bail by a a judge due to his gang affiliations. There is more to this story…
@LuFins-Dad said in SCOTUS:
The admin should have returned him. As far as I can see there's no reason to deem him a gang member. He was here legally under an asylum claim.
Meh, a lot of the media claims about his perfect behavior are incorrect. The guy has been arrested on multiple occasions and has also been denied bail by a a judge due to his gang affiliations. There is more to this story…
I haven't seen any of that. Do you have a link I can review?
-
Weird how they spin this as a victory when the court took away their one reason for invoking the AEA to begin with.
-
If they can.
BTW, did they give Trump a mechanism to do so?
Margolis' take:
-
7-2?
-
Yep. Alito is going to issue a statement.
If I read correctly, he did not necessary disagree with the decision, but more the timing.
Alito disapproved of the timing of the decision, which he described as being "literally in the middle of the night."
"[T]he Court issued unprecedented and legally questionable relief without giving the lower courts a chance to rule, without hearing from the opposing party, within eight hours of receiving the application, with dubious factual support for its order, and without providing any explanation for its order," Alito wrote.
The justice, who has served on the court since 2006, was joined by Justice Clarence Thomas in his dissent.
"I refused to join the Court’s order because we had no good reason to think that, under the circumstances, issuing an order at midnight was necessary or appropriate," Alito continued.
"Both the Executive and the Judiciary have an obligation to follow the law. The Executive must proceed under the terms of our order in Trump v. J. G. G., 604 U. S. ___ (2025) (per curiam), and this Court should follow established procedures."