,
5 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
One more time, this is the same Justice Department that _insisted_ to #SCOTUS, on at least five occasions, that there was no way to push final resolution of this dispute past June 30—and used that claim as its sole basis for seeking and receiving expedited review from the Court.
It doesn't matter what new rationale the government comes up with. _Any_ new rationale that would allow the question to asked would prove that the Solicitor General repeatedly lied to #SCOTUS—and used that lie to generate a false sense of urgency and to prejudice the challengers.
@hansilowang Before this case, #SCOTUS had not granted a petition for "certiorari before judgment" since 2004, and not in a standalone dispute since 1988.
And DOJ repeatedly used the June 30 "deadline" to also oppose the challengers' efforts to expand the record and obtain a limited remand.
And DOJ repeatedly used the June 30 "deadline" to also oppose the challengers' efforts to expand the record and obtain a limited remand.
In other words, any response at this juncture other than "we ran out of time" would be proof that all of those prior representations were false.
That's bad enough in the abstract, but we mustn't forget that it had an irreparable effect on how the litigation has unfolded, too.
That's bad enough in the abstract, but we mustn't forget that it had an irreparable effect on how the litigation has unfolded, too.
