[michigander]

If the Congress passed and the President signed a bill that purported to be immune to judicial review,...

We may get to find out about that soon...

H.R.418

REAL ID Act of 2005 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by House)

SEC. 102. WAIVER OF LAWS NECESSARY FOR IMPROVEMENT OF BARRIERS AT BORDERS.

Section 102(c) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1103 note) is amended to read as follows:

`(c) Waiver-

`(1) IN GENERAL- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall have the authority to waive, and shall waive, all laws such Secretary, in such Secretary's sole discretion, determines necessary to ensure expeditious construction of the barriers and roads under this section.

`(2) NO JUDICIAL REVIEW- Notwithstanding any other provision of law (statutory or nonstatutory), no court, administrative agency, or other entity shall have jurisdiction--

`(A) to hear any cause or claim arising from any action undertaken, or any decision made, by the Secretary of Homeland Security pursuant to paragraph (1); or

`(B) to order compensatory, declaratory, injunctive, equitable, or any other relief for damage alleged to arise from any such action or decision.'.

[Vicomte13]

That is precisely the way to set up the situation too.

If Congress, the Executive or State government simply defy a Supreme Court order, they will lose the public relations battle.

But this is a good way to go about it.
First, pick a controversial issue on which the majority of politically motivated people who will care will side with you.

Second, assert the Constitutional power to limit jurisdiction in the legislation itself. This tees up the issue nicely as a battle between Congress (and the President) using enumerated powers in the Constitution, against the general right of review asserted by the court.

Third, put it into place and start affecting civil rights thereby, ensuring a rapid-fire stream of litigation, forcing the issue to ripen quickly.

Then see what the Court does.
But I'll tell you what the Court will probably do: declare the legislation unconstitutional, just like they declared that the President's war powers don't extend to holding enemy combattants without trial.
And when they do, will the PRESIDENT (only)(because only the President enforces the law) nakedly defy a Supreme Court order and continue to enforce the law?
And if he does, will his own party in Congress resist the drumbeat of calls for impeachment?

Anyway it is all moot: this bill will be filibustered in the Senate by the Democrats.