Summary

First, it acted with startling speed—so quickly, in fact, that it published the order before Alito could finish writing his dissent; he was forced to note only that a “statement” would “follow.”

Relatedly, awkward phrasing in court’s order may imply that Alito—who first received the plaintiffs’ request—failed to refer it to the full court, as is custom, compelling the other justices to rip the case away from him.

Second, it is plain as day that the Supreme Court simply did not trust the Trump administration’s claims that it would not deport migrants over the weekend without due process.

Finally, and perhaps most obviously, it’s critical that only Thomas and Alito noted their dissents. When the court takes emergency action, justices don’t have to note their votes, but they usually do; we can probably assume that this order was 7–2. That would mean that Chief Justice John Roberts—along Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett—joined this rebuke to the Trump administration.

  • oyo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    1 day ago

    This piece of shit Alito actually wrote this in his dissent, presumably with a straight face: “The papers before us, while alleging that the appli- cants were in imminent danger of removal, provided little concrete support for that allegation.”

  • barneypiccolo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    69
    ·
    1 day ago

    The fact that they rushed their decision before Alito’s dissent is amazing. They knew that Alito could take his time writing it, giving HitlerPig cover to keep deporting while this decision remained buried. Instead, they basically said Fuck You to his attempt to collude with the Nazis. It was a direct slap in the face by 7 of his colleagues.

  • Zarxrax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    167
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    It then gave these migrants “notices,” in English only, declaring that they would be deported immediately, without stating that they could contest their deportations in court.

    Suddenly the executive order that English is the official language of the United States became a lot more clear in it’s purpose.

    • MagicShel@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      80
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Probably, but that shit isn’t even written in English. It’s written in lawyer.

      Have you noticed that with enough money you can’t just commit a crime? Trump could pop in the Epstein video of him on every display in Times Square and the response would be “the alarming possibility that Trump engaged in potentially illegal acts.”

      The law has become so inscrutable that you literally can’t know whether a crime has been committed until you have a jury trial. How is a soldier supposed to disobey illegal orders when he can’t possibly know whether orders are legal or not?

      I remember I wasn’t too long out of the army when the stuff about waterboarding and abu graib came out. I would’ve refused orders to torture people had I been there. And I’d have probably gone to Leavenworth for years for disobeying orders.

      It’s time to just burn the whole system down.

      • dhork@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        34
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        The law has become so inscrutable that you literally can’t know whether a crime has been committed until you have a jury trial. How is a soldier supposed to disobey illegal orders when he can’t possibly know whether orders are legal or not?

        I get what you’re saying, but one of our foundational principles (at least until now) was that people are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. So this notion that “we can’t know if a crime has been committed until a jury says so” isn’t a bug, it’s a feature. Yes, it makes things complicated, but it is designed to minimize the chance that innocent people can be deprived of their liberties just because the government doesn’t like them.

        • cAUzapNEAGLb@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 day ago

          I’d counter part of that is that US law is based on common law, which is defined by prior court cases not just law - vs civil law which is only based on law.

          There are issues with both of course, but, its common law that requires lawyers and knowledge of every court case and knowing what a judge in the 1800s thought a word means to win or lose a case.

          I think the common law system of justice is deeply flawed and leads to this legalese where everything is vague and malleable with no certainty

      • andros_rex@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 day ago

        It’s kinda amazing how this was something people debated for a long time, talked about potential benefits and consequences, tossed around different reasonable ways to mitigate harm that might be done, what the point or use would be…

        Then Trump just signs a piece of paper, and it’s barely even newsworthy before we move to the next thing.

    • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      70
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      They are criminally corrupt, and deserve to spend life in prison. The fact these whores sit atop the highest court shows how much of a banana republic kleptocracy the USA is.

      • The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        37
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        hey now. there’s no need to use that language here. sex work is difficult and involved, and many whores work tirelessly when they’re not getting paid to organise and fight for a better future through political engagement. they’re less like whores and more like vampires

    • Thunderbird4@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      43
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      It is kind of surprising that all three of the trump-appointed justices went along with the opinion. They’re no heroes by any means, but I’m still relieved when they decide to do the bare minimum. Really, it just shows how depraved Thomas and Alito are.

      • BassTurd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        2 days ago

        My gut thought, is they both had all of their dirty laundry aired during their confirmations, and haven’t been in long enough to really break too many laws. Thomas and Alito are as dirty as they come and have nothing to lose trying to protect themselves. They’re at different parts of their careers, and T and A have skeletons.

      • lemonaz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        Honestly, if they and people in government had done the bare minimum to uphold the law, much of this would not have happened. This administration has been working in legal gray areas since day one. I recently learned of the phrase “state of exception” and it fits a lot of what they’re doing and how they’re doing it.

      • Tujio@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 day ago

        Wasn’t he a judge for barely a year before getting appointed? Then for three decades he just agreed with whatever evil shit Scalia said. He really might not know how to be a judge.

        • TronBronson@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          16 hours ago

          He was a questionable pick back then, from my memory the Dem Senate grilled him so hard for his personal life that he hit the bench with a vindetta and has never made a good judicial decision in 3 decades. I believe he was also a hand pick from the heritage foundation, so he came with a TON of baggage and has always been this way as far I can remember. I’m no court scholar I just know Clarence Thomas is an asshole.

  • A_norny_mousse@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    82
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    “A majority of justices signaled that they no longer trust the administration to comply with the law”

    “…the government’s unlawful efforts…”

    “…the government lied to a federal judge…”

    “…this president will gleefully defy judicial orders…”

    It’s all topsy-turvy. A.K.A. “coup”. And not just any coup, a fascist coup. Who still thinks the comparison to Germany in 1933 is exaggerated? It isn’t. But maybe we can still influence where it goes from there.

    Also, fuck Alito and Thomas with a rusty pipe.

    • barneypiccolo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      2 days ago

      Years ago, I was calling out the Bush administration for following the Nazi playbook, and was constantly berated and insulted, and slapped with “Godwin’s Law,” which has been sufficiently proven to be Nazi counter-propaganda designed to silence critics, while the inexorable crawl to Nazism continued.

      • Tujio@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        1 day ago

        Hell, even Godwin came out and said “Oh yeah, these guys are totally acting like Nazis. Go ahead and compare them.”

      • A_norny_mousse@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 day ago

        Everyboy immediately thinks of the Holocaust, that’s why. The US isn’t quite there - yet. All the more reason to point out the similarities to the beginnings.

      • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 day ago

        I think Godwin’s law was meant for like arguing about tabs vs spaces, or other low stakes things.

        But as discussed elsewhere, conservatives have abysmal literacy and analytical skills, so it’s not surprising they wouldn’t understand when a comparison is merited.

        • barneypiccolo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          The true meaning of it got perverted into meaning that whenever a poster used a Nazi reference to describe the behavior of politicians, it violated Godwin’s Law. I was constantly accused of it whenever I mentioned that the Bush administration was obviously following the Nazi Playbook.

  • dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    62
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    I’m glad some of the justices finally located their consciences, but I’m afraid this will end up being too little too late.

      • jacksilver@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        36
        ·
        1 day ago

        I mean, that’s exactly why the checks and balances were set up this way. The founding fathers assumed no one branch would want to concede to another. Really it’s congress fucking it all up right now.

        • mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 day ago

          Yeah, congress refusing to check Trump has really allowed everything to snowball. They’re abdicating a LOT of power, purely because Trump has an ® next to his name.

        • RedditRefugee69@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          ·
          1 day ago

          Having the branches of government fight amongst themselves is kinda the idea.

          It’s when they all fall in line behind one man that you get 1930s Germany.

          Would I prefer they fight over how best to improve life for all of us and not how best to oppress people? Sure. But we’re talking choosing between lesser evils here.

        • Atelopus-zeteki@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 day ago

          I always look to what people actually do, not what they describe as their reasons. It doesn’t matter if you do the right thing for the wrong reasons, as long as you do the right thing. We have so much disengenuousness these days, look to their actions, not their words.

    • GoofSchmoofer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      2 days ago

      Honestly it wouldn’t be too little to late if the reps in the house and senate grew a spine and pushed back as well. But I think that they have had it too cushy for too long and don’t actually know how to govern.

  • Boddhisatva@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    2 days ago

    A federal judge in the Southern District of Texas had already blocked their removal—but the government sought to evade this order by busing the migrants into the Northern District of Texas, where the restraining order would not apply.

    Judge: You may not deport these people until this case is decided.

    DoJ/ICE: *busses people out of judge’s district* Fuck you, libtard.

    • NoForwardslashS@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      2 days ago

      You’d think this would escalate things rather than be an actual way to avoid repercussions. Would the same breakdown in law apply if a domestic abuse victim got a restraining order in the Southern District and then their abuser approached them in the Northern District?

      • yoshman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        It’s like your mom said you can’t spend the night at a friend’s house, so you don’t tell her and spend the night at a different friend’s house.

      • tburkhol@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        2 days ago

        It’s pretty much the same strategy Trump used to avoid serious penalties from his New York cases: just move to Florida.

      • phdepressed@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        That’s where the constitutional crisis comes in because they aren’t listening to court orders. The ones who’d enforce a court order are the ones defying it. “Who watches the watchers?”

  • banzhaff@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    1 day ago

    They absolutely would have defied the lower court’s order and just flown them to El Salvador. Then, when confronted, they could claim some sort of misunderstanding/incompetency. The worst that could be done to them would be to force them to ask El Salvador to return the migrants, to which the government of El Salvador just says “no.”

    It’s better to seek forgiveness than ask for permission.

  • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    2 days ago

    I’ll believe that this was effective when it’s actually confirmed that orangeboi and DoJ + ICE did not in fact, ignore the order. My assumption at this point is that they will do it anyways.

  • Atelopus-zeteki@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    I never thought I’d see an ally in Roberts, Gorsh, Kava-beer, or boney carrot! Nice to see! Welcome to the resistance!

  • psycho_driver@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 day ago

    Sounds like the Supreme Court has been overly stressed of late and making poor decisions. I know of a cozy little retreat down in El Salvador in which they can get some R&R and a fresh perspective.