If a president decides to ban guns through an EO, should lower federal courts be unable to issue a nationwide injunction?

[Slartibartfast]

If a president decides to ban all guns through an EO, should lower federal courts be unable to issue a nationwide injunction to stop that EO?

Alternatively, if a president decides to alter birthright citizenship through an EO, should lower courts be allowed to issue national injunctions on that EO?

 

[CaughtInThe]

Gonna need a truckload of popcorn.

 

[Pound4abrown]

Yeah, like I said elsewhere, be careful what you wish for.
You may get it, and more.

 

[Hatuey]

 

[Bonnot]

Yeah, like I said elsewhere, be careful what you wish for.
You may get it, and more.

The right won't be held to the same standard given they have equally as hyportical judges in charge of SCOTUS.

SCOTUS will rule against it, and then also the Dems would just cave because they're slaves to decorum and civility and instutitions even though the insututions are poisoned beyond belief.

 

[StillBallin75]

Lower courts SHOULD be able to issue nationwide injunctions on both fronts.

 

[Cameron]

A normal administration, once receiving a court order that their conduct is unconstitutional, would stop doing it nationwide irrespective of the scope of the injunction.

 

[coyote505]

A normal administration, once receiving a court order that their conduct is unconstitutional, would stop doing it nationwide irrespective of the scope of the injunction

That would depend on the reputation and reasoning of the court. I wouldn't expect much deference from a liberal administration to a ruling from Amarillo, or by a conservative administration to a ruling from San Francisco.

 

[WorldWatcher]

If a president decides to ban all guns through an EO, should lower federal courts be unable to issue a nationwide injunction to stop that EO?

Yes. The President has unitary power to do as he wishes and only the SCOTUS decisions count.

There for the President's ban would only last a couple of years as the case made it's way through the lower courts to develop the factual history.

Alternatively, if a president decides to alter birthright citizenship through an EO, should lower courts be allowed to issue national injunctions on that EO?

You kind of flipped context here so the correct answer to this phrasing is "no" but for the same reasons as above.
.
.
.
.
.
In no case should ANY lower court be able to undermine the policy of the Unitary President.

WW

 

[Cameron]

@coyote505 can you please link me to the second quote you are attributing to me above?

 

[WorldWatcher]

Yes. The President has unitary power to do as he wishes and only the SCOTUS decisions count.

There for the President's ban would only last a couple of years as the case made it's way through the lower courts to develop the factual history.



You kind of flipped context here so the correct answer to this phrasing is "no" but for the same reasons as above.
.
.
.
.
.
In no case should ANY lower court be able to undermine the policy of the Unitary President.

WW

Just to be clear...




WW

 

[bomberfox]

Just to be clear...

View attachment 67571219


WW

I looked at it as cynicism.

 

[coyote505]

@coyote505 can you please link me to the second quote you are attributing to me above?

I apologize for the screw up. Keyboard error that for some reason I was unable to fix ( tried several times). It was my response, not part of your quote.

 

[Cameron]

I apologize for the screw up. Keyboard error that for some reason I was unable to fix ( tried several times). It was my response, not part of your quote.

Ok thanks. No worries.