Congress just rubber stamped Trump’s ‘Grand’ Wishes….
Seems the Alito 5 did NOT give Trump ALL he wanted?…..
The Supreme’s gave the answer they thought was Right….
‘Class Action Suits’
Federal Judges have taken the High Courts advice and NOT given up countering Trump & Co.
Class Action Suits
AND?…..
Creative Legal paths Around the Alito led ruling….
And THAT”s where things are starting to go to….
Federal judges and Courts ain’t giving up like the High Court seems to have in anointing Donald Trump as the ‘King’….
If the Supreme Court’s near-ban on nationwide injunctions was the earth-shattering victory President Donald Trump claimed, no one seems to have told his courtroom opponents.
While the absence of that tool is clearly a sea change for the judiciary, early results indicate that judges see other paths to impose sweeping restrictions on government actions they deem unlawful. And those options remain viable in many major pending lawsuits against the administration.
Since the high court’s ruling last Friday, U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss issued an extraordinary rejection of the president’s effort to ban asylum for most southern border-crossers, a ruling with nationwide effect.
Moss, an Obama appointee, emphasized that his decision was not one of the now-verboten injunctions. Instead, it relied on two alternative routes the Supreme Court acknowledged remained available for those challenging Trump’s policies: class actions, which allow large groups to band together and sue over a common problem, and the Administrative Procedure Act, a federal law that permits courts to “set aside” federal agency actions that violate the law, including rules, regulations and memos laying out new procedures.
The ruling by Moss drew intense outrage from the Trump administration, which accused the judge of going “rogue” and violating the Supreme Court’s intentions.
Hours later, U.S. District Judge John Bates, a George W. Bush appointee, ordered federal health officials to restore hundreds of web pages containing gender-related data that officials took down pursuant to a Trump executive order cracking down on “gender ideology.” He described the move as an example of federal officials “acting first and thinking later.”
Despite the nationwide implications of his ruling, Bates emphasized that the APA allows courts to effectively undo unjustified agency action, adding that even the Justice Department did “not argue that more tailored relief is even possible here, let alone appropriate.” The judge also left open the possibility that officials could go back to the drawing board and find a lawful way to restrict content related to so-called “gender ideology.”
And in Massachusetts, Reagan-appointed U.S. District Judge William Young was careful to emphasize that his expansive ruling restoring health research grants — cut following the same executive order cited by Bates — was nonetheless tailored only to provide relief to the organizations that sued. Like Bates, Young’s ruling relied on the APA.
“Public officials, in their haste to appease the Executive, simply moved too fast and broke things,” Young wrote.
…
The judges overseeing at least four cases stemming from Trump’s effort to deny birthright citizenship to children of undocumented immigrants, which triggered the Supreme Court’s injunction ruling in the first place, must now decide whether the nationwide blocks they granted still apply. The Supreme Court emphasized that nationwide relief may still be appropriate in cases filed by the states, and other plaintiffs have quickly refashioned their complaints as class action lawsuits that could still result in something akin to a nationwide injunction….
Federal Judges….
Absent the Alito 5?
ARE the REAL Hero’s the last 6 months….