Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: KitJ
Not 5-4. This Order has two dissents, Sotomayor and Ginsberg. None of the others are named. The order says ...

The application for stay presented to JUSTICE KAGAN and by her referred to the Court is granted. The district court's July 24, 2019 order granting a preliminary injunction and September 9, 2019 order restoring the nationwide scope of the injunction are stayed in full pending disposition of the Government's appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and disposition of the Government's petition for a writ of certiorari, if such writ is sought. If a writ of certiorari is sought and the Court denies the petition, this order shall terminate automatically. If t he Court grants the petition for a writ of certiorari, this order shall terminate when the Court enters its judgment.

878 posted on 09/11/2019 5:09:00 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 855 | View Replies ]


To: Cboldt

Quoting from the Fox article, part of it, and if you can explain what is meant that would be appreciated. I assume, but could be wrong, that SCOTUS is addressing this because the feds wanted the ruling expedited? Since it’s still working it’s way through lower courts, it will reach SCOTUS later, for a decision based on merits? Something like that?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-green-lights-trumps-immigration-asylum-ban.amp
\
In a major win for the Trump administration, the Supreme Court issued an order late Wednesday ending all injunctions that had blocked the White House’s ban on asylum for anyone trying to enter the U.S. by traveling through a third country, such as Mexico, without seeking protection there.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals – long a liberal bastion that has been aggressively reshaped into a more moderate court by the Trump administration – handed the White House a partial victory in the case on Monday by ending the nationwide injunction. But the 9th Circuit kept the injunction alive within the territorial boundaries of the circuit, which encompasses California, Arizona, Alaska, Hawaii, Montana, Nevada, Idaho, Guam, Oregon and Washington.

The Supreme Court’s order was not a final ruling on the policy’s merits but does allow the policy to take effect nationwide, including in the 9th Circuit, while the case makes its way through the lower courts.

President Trump tweeted that the ruling was a “BIG United States Supreme Court WIN for the Border on Asylum!” The administration had argued in a brief to the Supreme Court Tuesday that unless the nationwide injunction is lifted, it “would severely disrupt the orderly administration of an already overburdened asylum system.”


886 posted on 09/11/2019 5:21:40 PM PDT by little jeremiah (New tagline in the pipeline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 878 | View Replies ]

To: Cboldt

That’s what I get for quoting FoxNews. Hmph.

Thank you for the correction and clarification.

Your explanation here is great for this layman...
https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3777266/posts?page=888#888

Good news for now. I hope the ride through the lower courts goes well for us!


893 posted on 09/11/2019 6:12:21 PM PDT by KitJ (Shall not be infringed...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 878 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson