A new emergency application in an immigration case provides an important opportunity for Justice Barrett to enforce her skepticism about open-ended "administrative stays."
It's easy to have the impression that the "conservative" Justices do not care about procedure or precedent, and are just arbitrarily achieving the results that they want. I wonder if J. Barrett will continue to push for procedural propriety or will join her fellow conservative justices in anything-goes, results-oriented judging.
You’d think that when existing rules allow for a TRO or preliminary injunction, and when the party itself asks for this relief, there would be no need (and no basis) to invent a district court “administrative stay.” But hey, what do I know - I only worked for district court judges for 20-plus years. I guess we just lacked imagination.
Did you ever have a District Court Judge who deliberately didn't decide a matter precisely to prevent a merits decision? That is what is going on here and it is not only at the District Court level; that is exactly what Alito is doing as well.
The corruption is strong in this guy. To think that representing one of the parties in a series of litigation matters against the other party regarding the same topic would not give a reasonable person the appearance of partiality. . . It's time for a mandamus.
Judge Barker's conduct is indefensible and an abuse of the rule of law and ---in its Nationwide reach---Constitution. What is far more disturbing is Alito's silence. Essentially, he has already decided the issue and is simply looking for a way to get his result into effect without engaging the other members of the Court. Alito evidently thinks that the Court's long standing requirement that there be at least 4 Justices to sustain a lower court stay does not apply to him.
It's easy to have the impression that the "conservative" Justices do not care about procedure or precedent, and are just arbitrarily achieving the results that they want. I wonder if J. Barrett will continue to push for procedural propriety or will join her fellow conservative justices in anything-goes, results-oriented judging.
You’d think that when existing rules allow for a TRO or preliminary injunction, and when the party itself asks for this relief, there would be no need (and no basis) to invent a district court “administrative stay.” But hey, what do I know - I only worked for district court judges for 20-plus years. I guess we just lacked imagination.
Did you ever have a District Court Judge who deliberately didn't decide a matter precisely to prevent a merits decision? That is what is going on here and it is not only at the District Court level; that is exactly what Alito is doing as well.
The corruption is strong in this guy. To think that representing one of the parties in a series of litigation matters against the other party regarding the same topic would not give a reasonable person the appearance of partiality. . . It's time for a mandamus.
seems that the judges are taking a lesson from the djt 'how to stymie the legal system' book.
Thank you for bringing this to our attention and explaining what's going on
Judge Barker's conduct is indefensible and an abuse of the rule of law and ---in its Nationwide reach---Constitution. What is far more disturbing is Alito's silence. Essentially, he has already decided the issue and is simply looking for a way to get his result into effect without engaging the other members of the Court. Alito evidently thinks that the Court's long standing requirement that there be at least 4 Justices to sustain a lower court stay does not apply to him.