reSee.it - Tweets Saved By @pjaicomo
@pjaicomo - Patrick Jaicomo
The Supreme Court has issued its long-awaited ruling in the Alien Enemies Act case, AARP v. Trump. The Court rules 7-2 that AEA detainees need more notice than was given. So they cannot presently be deported. Kavanaugh concurs. Alito and Thomas dissent (as before). 1/ https://t.co/jXNl46YQhD
@pjaicomo - Patrick Jaicomo
After noting the gamesmanship, SCOTUS explains that the 5th Cir. erred in finding no jurisdiction. There is jurisdiction for emergency appeals when the practical effect of the lower courts is the same as refusing an injunction. Also, the gov't's notice was insufficient. 2/ https://t.co/Qf970os9Tg
@pjaicomo - Patrick Jaicomo
Because the gov't took such drastic action so quickly, 24 hour notice is nought enough to satisfy DUE PROCESS, which JJG v. Trump already held is required. But how much notice is required can be addressed on remand, while an injunction stays in place. Now, Alito's dissent. 3/
@pjaicomo - Patrick Jaicomo
Joined by Justice Thomas, Alito says there is no jurisdiction. He acknowledges that there can be jurisdiction in light of practical reality, but here, "the D.Ct. had no good reason to think the petitioners were in imminent danger of removal." 4/ https://t.co/oNRGpeEmcI
@pjaicomo - Patrick Jaicomo
Calling the evidence "sketchy," Alito says it was reasonable to give the gov't 24 hours to respond to the emergency motion. He says that ACLU's actions in demanding an immediate ruling "represented a very stark departure from what is usually regarded as acceptable practice." 5/ https://t.co/Pp8jcLzevK
@pjaicomo - Patrick Jaicomo
So Alito argues that the inaction was not constructive denial. He also says the Court mustn't consider evidence not in the record on 4/18. So there was no "concrete evidence" that removals were imminent. 6 declarations and a photo of the notice of removal were not enough. 6/ https://t.co/lhHnI1NxQ6
@pjaicomo - Patrick Jaicomo
Even if there were denial, there is no grounds for reversal, Alito says, because the applicants failed to show a likelihood of success on the merits. This includes that class relief would be available (a point the majority disagrees with). 7/ https://t.co/ZvC0UIWIWm
@pjaicomo - Patrick Jaicomo
Alito says that class relief is probably unavailable for habeas corpus. And even if something like class relief were available, there is unlikely a class here because the named plaintiffs (unlike the putative class) did get notice sufficient for them to file habeas. 8/ https://t.co/kmcX5a8SFn
@pjaicomo - Patrick Jaicomo
Alito also criticizes the majority for not engaging with the d.ct. ruling and overreaching in its decision. Now, we can return to the majority's response to the dissent... 9/ https://t.co/FqA5Dar3cw
@pjaicomo - Patrick Jaicomo
The majority says that Alito's reasoning is not persuasive. First, he mischaracterizes the evidence on 4/18, which showed an imminent risk of permanent removal without due process: namely, that people were being loaded on buses to the airport. 10/ https://t.co/arkdF3sWLt
@pjaicomo - Patrick Jaicomo
And nobody, including the named plaintiffs, received adequate notice. Notably, the Court "rejects the proposition that a class-action defendant may defeat class treatment, if it is otherwise proper, by promising as a matter of grace to treat named plaintiffs differently." 11/ https://t.co/s0QGQ8PU6A
@pjaicomo - Patrick Jaicomo
So the gov't cannot remove anyone in the class under the Alien Enemies Act, pending further review in the courts. But if, as it claims, the gov't has grounds to otherwise remove people in the class, it can do so under those lawful authorities. 12/ https://t.co/u8zJF6xyxz
@pjaicomo - Patrick Jaicomo
Now, Justice Kavanaugh’s concurrence. Given the urgency, he would have granted certiorari and immediately resolve the legal issues. Now, things will take even more time on remand. 13/ https://t.co/sr0uaydatj
@pjaicomo - Patrick Jaicomo
Ok, now my 2 cents: This decision is a strong message from the Court to the executive to knock off the shenanigans—both in and out of court. Justice Kavanaugh’s concurrence highlights that the Court is not going the gov’t to get its way with unclean hands. 14/
@pjaicomo - Patrick Jaicomo
And with respect to Justices Alito and Thomas, it simply beggars belief that there was insufficient evidence that the gov’t was about to imminently rendition the detainees (who were on buses) and then pretend it couldn’t get them back (see Abrego-Garcia). 15/