Related Posts
Hi fishes,
Why TCS is so rude and self proclaimed kinda. I declined TCS offer last year as they were giving very less CTC. Now I got interviewed again with TCS and cleared all the rounds but they are not reactivating my ibegin portal for document upload since I rejected them last year...in this way u think they will never ever reactivate my profile.
Tata Consultancy
Hi currently I have 6.4 years experience in Pharmacovigilance Tata Consultancy and I would like to change my domain to Arisg/Argus database technical background process buy learning SQL. Is it a right time for me to move to this domain. What all topics should be learnt in SQL to move to this domain.
Additional Posts in Law
Rising Star
Rising Star
Chief
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
I have mixed feelings on this one. I don't want to get too political here, but I do think it's important to be able to curb executive orders when they aren't appropriate, are an overreach, or require more scrutiny. I'll be interested to see how the next 30 days play out
I think you maybe missed the the point? Absolutely no one disagrees with your take, there. Zero people. The entire question is— should a *single* district court judge (intentionally selected solely bc it’s a favorable venue) have the power to decide what is or isn’t an overreach and then have that decision apply to the entire nation. As ACB aptly wrote— its judicial imperialism (and it’s abused by both left and right btw). The only people who oppose this ruling are those who are mentally (and many— emotionally) incapable of interpreting the law in any manner other than “does this fit my political leanings.” That they were ever handed a law degree is an indictment of the legal education system.
A step in the right direction.
A lot of you are contract lawyers and it shows.
Stop reading write-ups written by journalists without law degrees and use your training.
This ruling doesn’t prevent a district court from certifying a class and enjoining an executive order nationwide. In practice, I don’t think it will do much other than require a little more procedure.
What it DOES do is allow partisans to score political points and let Republicans go on TV (and Fishbowl apparently) to say “See, district courts were doing a bad thing and SCOTUS agrees with us” when that bad thing was “preventing enforcement of a blatantly unconstitutional executive order” (which, by the way, the government did not argue was constitutional). Bad faith
I agree with you. TV propaganda and excitement is often different from the reality inside the court. I think the SCOTUs decision is more beneficial to everyone.
Careful the TDS sufferers will come out and project all over you
It's about time. Nationwide injunctions were being abused routinely. Attempting national governance subject to the whim of any one of the 677 federal District Court judges was untenable.
A5 surely you’ve heard the quip: Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.
Congrats to Dems. Job well done! Keep practicing law as if the composition of Scotus is immaterial. 😉
I’m not disagreeing with you that Dems played the game foolishly and I’m also not disagreeing that RBG played her own legacy away out of want for glory or what ever her motive was. All I’m saying is the Republicans played dirty to push this through.
A step in the right direction
Sounds like we have a king now. If Trump wants to send everyone named “Joe” to the Salvadoran gulag, and your family can’t find a lawyer to sue, another Joe suing won’t do you any good.
A5 Such an astonishingly stupid take.
It’s what kagan was calling for in 2022
Kagan at Northwestern: “It simply cannot be correct… that a single district judge can halt a nationwide policy and keep it halted for years while it undergoes the standard legal process.” It’s the sad plight of the living constitutionalist. The interpretation depends on whose politics it benefits at any given moment.
Law is political. What is happening now is a case study that should disburse positivist lawyers of the notion that law is merely a system of rules rather than a social form tied to the other forms of capitalist society. The decision is neither right nor wrong. Law is fundamentally indeterminate. What it is, is what it is today, and that remains until it does not. The back and forth about interpretation does little since both sides can present rational arguments on any given legal issue.
lol this all makes me think of that Harvard prick in Good Will Hunting. HOW YA LIKE THEM APPLES!
I think John Roberts has done an excellent job delegitimizing SCOTUS and that issuing this order for *this* case is about as open an endorsement of Dred Scott-type logic as you could ask for. Conservatives applauding this are full mask-off.
We're going to pretend the fucking *Roberts Court* has a problem with "judicial supremacy"? It's an insult to everyone's intelligence.
Since the socialist party can't pass good, common sense, and beneficial legislation that people will actually vote for, they abuse the court system to force their legislation agenda. Now they don't have that anymore. Liberals are going to be lost in the woods for a long time
Ooooh who is socialist?! Oh... "liberals are socialist"
I love seeing dumb takes from “Partners”
Go bring in some business. We’ll do the actual work and you can take the credit. Because it’s clear from dumb takes like that, you’ve forgotten what it means to be an actual attorney.
I think the Supreme Court s Ruling stopping nationwide jurisdiction by District Court is well placed in law. This is more so because decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States are not ordinarily decisions but standard policy for justice delivery that must be sustainable. Their decisions apply to the present and future situations. One of those decisions is that of Madison v Madbury. It was a difficult decision for the court to make in that century but it's benefit endures till this generation and I believe for future generations.
Just like the Madison decision, the SCOTUS decision on the nationwide injunction will endure many generations. I think it is rooted in quality thinking.
There are alternatives mode of challenging the eye of the storm Executive Order. SCOTUS decision is an incentive to exploring those viable alternatives.
May God bless the United States of America.