Supreme Court hands Trump major win, limits judges’ ability to block birthright citizenship order nationwide

Funny how SCOTUS had no problems whatsoever with nationwide injunctions when Biden was president…

Well that's the thing with SCOTUS. You have to ask them to have an opinion on something. They probably wouldn't have had a problem with national injunctions under Biden if that authority had been challenged in court. And then we would have already had that precedent from literally the same judges for to rely on now.
- If something is unconstitutional then it's unconstitutional. I don't understand why they're creating more unnecessary work so now party A complains, courts say ok it's not right, but now party B has to go through the same process, etc etc etc... so now we have to have essentially 50 individual cases to go over the same thing when each state encounters this issue unless they can manage to create a class lawsuit out of it.
  To my cynical mind it seems like excessive delay on otherwise straightforward cases was the intended outcome.
- Prescient is irrelevant, Row v Wade
- Several of biden's nationally injuncted cases made it to the supreme Court, specifically the cases about student debt.
  I don't recall the department of Justice questioning the national injunctions legality at that time though, tbf.

It's going to be awhile before folks recognize just how damaging this is, if it plays out as I expect.

Trump's entire life policy is to ignore norms, contracts, laws, and opposition until he's stopped. It's still dumbfounding he's gotten this far, because he's not some strange unknown entity - he's a typical sociopath, pushing boundaries as far as they'll go in his favor until he's actually prevented from doing so.

His "litigate to delay" strategy is right in line with this. And now the norm is that his administration doesn't just get to act unlawfully until a court enjoins him from it (if even that, and if even he follows the order). It's now that his administration gets to act unlawfully to any individual who hasn't, on their own, challenged it and won in court. And given how fast he is normalizing fascism, even if a substantial number challenge him, in a year when the cases are "won," it'll be too late, the moment will be lost.

If there was any doubt as to the health of the rule of law, this is basically the end of the line.

Yep. First amendment to second. All cases that are on the constitutional sphere are affected
It isn't quite what you've italicized, but make no mistake that's it's still a terrible precedent to set. Preliminary injunctions can still be granted by district courts, but now they need to be brought in the form of a class action and all the tediousness that entails. ACLU thankfully had one ready to go it seems just in case of this and it's been filed already.
Nevertheless, this also enables insane infringement of the first amendment. There is nothing stopping him from declaring membership of a particular political party is illegal, including state parties, and then requiring each state to independently challenge under a restricted class action. It's ludicrous.
It's what the people want. It's what he did all his life, including his first term, and he announced he would do, and he is now doing.
At least there is peace in the middle east and in Ukraine, and eggs are a dime a dozen...

The main takeaways here are:

The justices, in a 6-3 vote along ideological lines, said that in most cases, judges can only grant relief to the parties who brought a particular lawsuit and may not extend those decisions to protect other individuals without going through the process of converting a suit into a class action.

The court did not rule on the legality of Trump’s order purporting to end birthright citizenship, although the three liberal justices said the president’s directive was clearly unlawful.

So, the plaintiffs will need to certify as a class in order for judges to issue nationwide injunctions now. That's a pretty huge shift.

Man, what a great year for anarchism in the USA, first we had a No Kings day, now we have a No Citizens day! /gallows humor
Fr tho, this is awful. It seems like for now at least everybody needs to get their own lawyers and court dates to prove they're a citizen if the Trump administration wants to go after you. BTW, a lot of law firms have struck deals with the administration limiting the kinds of pro bono work they will do. Also deportations to third party countries are legal for now. Also, they may deport you while you have a case pending and then do nothing to bring you back when a court does order it.
So, yeah, they've probably created a "no due process needed, exile all the uppity poor brown queers and any other deviant troublemakers we don't like, unless they have someone inside the system that can get them a pass (and even then maybe do it anyway)" machine here. Call it fascism, dictatorship, totalitarianism, social darwinism, cyberpunk dystopia, whatever, I think we're here now.
- Call it fascism, dictatorship, totalitarianism, social darwinism, cyberpunk dystopia, whatever, I think we’re here now.
  I think we've been there a long time it's just taken someone as chaotic and despotic as Trump to actually use those reigns of power for this kind of thing. I remember feeling similarly about the kind of shit we let Dubya Bush get away with, and then learning some history and realizing this kind of overreach horseshit went all the way back to Reagan... then all the way back to Nixon.
  The system was already this way, it was just waiting for the right twisted freak to fuck it all up from the inside.
That’s a pretty huge shit.
fixed that for you
This is essentially just further entrenchment of the imperial executive theory.
Methinks I’m gonna explore getting the fuck out of here for good.

“The universal injunction was conspicuously nonexistent for most of our Nation’s history,” Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote in the majority opinion.

So was your right to vote. Shall we let the executive branch take that away on a whim as well?

This is the most important thing, in my opinion, that the fucked up Trump court has ruled on. Saying a president can't be prosecuted for crimes that were performed as part of his job was wild but unlikely to actually occur. This is both wild and already occurring on a daily basis. This is so unbelievably asinine.

To sum up: if a judge rules a law or action is obviously unconstitutional, the only person it is unconstitutional for is the person who brought the case to that specific judge.

On the one hand this seems awfully terrible for individual citizens that we now all have to file our own lawsuit. But on the other hand it also seems crippling to the federal government having to defend all of those lawsuits.

Supreme Court tears down the constitution and rule of law

The best time ~~to plant a tree~~ buy a gun was 20 years ago, the second best time is now

Yup. Anti-gun my whole life. Still am. But I'm in the process of buying my first firearm.
Historically, fascism has to be put down with bullets.
- We're coming up to a time where we may need to use the second amendment as the founding fathers intended- and the conservative sheep won't be happy about it!
- if you take a local gun safety course a Utah concealed permit can be obtained by mail and due to reciprocity agreements allows you to carry in most states, all the blue ones below.

And America's descent into fascism continues unabated.

Buy guns. Buy ammo.

Lmao Americans ain't gonna do shit with their weapons besides use them to post on tiktok and to take them to school.
Tyranny? We dont stop that here with our guns no sir. We want it.

Say Trump announces that you're not a citizen, that gay marriage doesn't exist, that all women must give birth annually, whatever. If you're victimized by it, and have the money or can find a freebie lawyer, maybe you sue the federal government, and maybe you win. But even if you win, you only win for you. The millions of others in exactly your same situation each need to file their own lawsuits, and hope to win. (Unless it's a class action lawsuit, which involves separate and very, very difficult legal hurdles.)

If I'm understanding this wrong, and cripes I hope I am, please 'splain it to me.

Well, clearly the court only said that the three judges in question had to stop issuing nationwide injunctions, right? The others haven't done anything yet, and since each case has to be tried independently....

So fucking stupid. And a clear signal that they're going to start deporting citizens now, since even though I can show my birth certificate, I can't show my parents, or my parents parents and so on. Trace it back far enough and everyone will run into an ancestor that they can't prove the citizenship of. "Oops, your citizenship is actually invalid! We're sending you to a central American prison".

Only in the aftermath will we know which moment was the final toppling, but for now, I'd nominate this.

My estimate is that this will result on 410 lawsuits filed per day. :o

I think it's not a smart move to have 150 000 lawsuits per year over the same question - it's much preferable to have 1 lawsuit for a whole class of people - defending the rights of everyone in the same situation - and some extra lawsuits for those who want to present a unique take on the matter.

Are the judges of the highest court in America actually high?