What are those two cases? I would like to be able to cite them to the libs at my workplace.
One is Trump v. Hawaii. Justice Thomas wrote:
"Injunctions that prohibit the Executive Branch from applying a law or policy against anyone…have become increasingly common. District courts, including the one here, have begun imposing universal injunctions without considering their authority to grant such sweeping relief. These injunctions are beginning to take a toll on the federal court system—preventing legal questions from percolating through the federal courts, encouraging forum shopping, and making every case a national emergency for the courts and for the Executive Branch.I am skeptical that district courts have the authority to enter universal injunctions. These injunctions did not emerge until a century and a half after the founding. And they appear to be inconsistent with longstanding limits on equitable relief and the power of Article III courts. If their popularity continues, this Court must address their legality.
There was a similar reversed similar immigration case where the SCOTUS slapped the ninth Circuit for ignoring the previous precedent set in Hawaii. Same thing. Poking their judicial noses in policy decisions where they don't belong.