IANAL but a lot of lawyers seem to be outraged, too. But this reads like “because DACA”.
The administration “failed to show a likelihood of success on the claim that the memorandum rescinding the Migrant Protection Protocols was not arbitrary and capricious,” the court said in a short, unsigned order. In such emergency matters, the court often does not elaborate on its reasoning.
But in its order Tuesday night, the court cited a decision from 2020 in which it stopped the Trump administration from dismantling the Obama-era program Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, which protected undocumented immigrants who were brought into the country as children.
ETA a note from the article on the SC DACA decision:
The difference is that decision was made after full briefing and argument, rather than on an emergency request to maintain the status quo while appeals continue.
The Jan. 6 insurrectionist who is accused of stealing a laptop from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) office during the attack allegedly participated in a neo-Nazi chat room, an investigation by Vice found.
It is unclear exactly what effect the ruling will have. The Department of Homeland Security said in a statement that it will continue to challenge the district court ruling. “As the appeal process continues, however, DHS will comply with the order in good faith,” the statement said. “Alongside interagency partners, DHS has begun to engage with the Government of Mexico in diplomatic discussions surrounding the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP). DHS remains committed to building a safe, orderly, and humane immigration system that upholds our laws and values.”
And the government notes:
In his brief to the court, Fletcher said reviving the program would be difficult. “MPP has been rescinded for 2.5 months, suspended for 8 months, and largely dormant for nearly 16 months,” Fletcher wrote.
If this was a ‘junket’ who approved it? I’m pretty sure it wasn’t Moulton and Meijer hijacking a jet to take them to Kabul. So now the powers that be are ‘livid’? Ummmm…is the media making this a ‘thing’ to distract from the criticism they are making too much of the airlift with flimsy comparisons to Vietnam? Something smells funny and it’s not the two vets that flew in to Afghanistan to check out the ‘stories’.
Replying to myself, I reread the story and I see that the SCOTUS ruled that the administration did not show how its action on the “remain in Mexico” policy was not “arbitrary and capricious.”
So SCOTUS issued a ruling that appears arbitrary and capricious because the very real harm of the policy is clear to anyone not blinded by partisan blinkers.
And I have read that their next project is to find that courts can overrule the citizens themselves on election outcomes.
We appear to have a metaphorically bomb-throwing, metaphorically terrorist SCOTUS–the law itself being the target of the terror.
Hmm…I think their timing could definitely have been better, but I wonder if their visit was that bad*. At this point, you could argue that it was like tossing a couple of twigs on a raging forest fire: not good, but also not likely to make much difference. If a visit from 2 low level reps is that disruptive, it shows just how desperate the situation on the ground is.
I would like to hear a more in-depth explanation from them on why they made the trip.
If two members of Congress can safely fly into Kabul and get out, perhaps the situation is not as “chaotic” as the “narrative” that much of the media have been spinning.
Hey, Seth–pretty much by definition your going into Kabul meant someone didn’t get to come out, or was delayed getting out. That plane with empty seats you flew out on? I’m guessing they flew it out before it was full because they needed to get you and your pal out of there. So you cost some people their chance to get out now.
And that’s besides your disruption of the process. You probably cost 100 to hundreds of people their opportunities to get out, and maybe their lives. Fuck you and your pal Meijer and fuck your stunt.
The two flew in on a chartered plane intended to bring evacuees out. There might not have been an explicit rule against it, just like there is no explicit sign on a highway overpass warning people not to jump off. As it is the two took up space on later chartered plane leaving Kabul with evacuees. At a minimum Pelosi should state that the House will not reimburse these two showboaters for their expenses.
If Texas schools can ignore the Texas Supreme Court because it’s the right thing to do, then the Biden administration can ignore the SCOTUS because it’s the right thing to do.
In both cases, lives are at stake.
