3/ DOJ's position is oral ruling was NOT a governing injunction. Cites case law. Also, DOJ acknowledges oral order was broader than minute order and says minute order controls.
4/ Sounds like Trump may have given a separate order beyond the Proclamation.
5/ Once outside territory they were already "removed" DOJ argues so they didn't violate TRO that said you can't "remove" them.
6/ I'm confused here if the DOJ is saying removed based on Aliens Act but not Proclamation or NOT Aliens Act.
7/ DOJ won't tell Court what happened after outside airspace because concerns foreign relations.
8/ DOJ now brings Article II point which I saw as being strongest for the "turning around the planes" aspect of the dispute.
9/ In short: "With all due respect, your Honor, Step Off!"
12/ Judge likely noted that the filing did NOT say the two flights were outside of US Territory AFTER the minute order was entered. Note the word choice: "As to any flights..."
13/ He will also likely asked if the 3rd flight involved Aliens Enemy Act removal or other removal because Trump could have ordered them removed/made same findings just not in the proclamation.
14/ Judge is going to be pissed over several things...more later.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
THREADETTE: SCOTUS issued opinion today in case where group representing immigration judges sought to challenge in federal court rule that they had to get a supervisor's approval before speaking re immigration issues. 1/
2/ The full opinion (which is short) and Justice Thomas's concurrence are must-reads because IMNSHO they are SCOTUS first group slap to rouge judges. supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf…
🔥Pending before SCOTUS right now is petition for cert in what is one of most consequential constitutional cases related to liberty in the form of a free-market. And yet, few have taken notice of the case. In short, EPA decided who to give market share to based on "equity." 1/
@NCLAlegal 3/3 Here is the docket for those interested. It is truly appalling unelected bureaucrats are deciding whose business to kill--including taking their market share to give to so-called disadvantaged folks who never built business w/ sweat equity.
THREADETTE: SCOTUS's decision yesterday in Callais case striking down Louisiana's unconstitutional race-based districts prompted voters who brought challenge to immediately file an application asking Court to rush case back to district court so the districts could be redrawn. 1/
2/ The losers who want to continue to discriminate based on race in district mapping oppose sending case back to district court on expedited basis. And Alito ordered them to respond by 4 p.m. Fact that pro-discrimination side wants to delay case with midterms around corner makes
3/ me wonder, given @MZHemingway reporting in Alito, that Leftist justices dragged feet in Dobbs, holding up opinion by delaying dissent and THEN unnecessarily citing another SCOTUS decision that had not yet been released, whether the Leftist justices did the same here BUT