• jacksilver@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    The Supreme Court hasn’t actually decided if it’s illegal or not. This is just about injunctions to stop Trumps EO.

    That being said, it’s also a federal issue so you couldn’t get a patchwork like abortion.

    Unless I’m missing something?

    • taiyang@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      The news was talking about the patchwork, and yeah, you’d think it’s a federal issue but the injunctions can only apply where the lawsuits were, hence the 22 states that sued. At least for now.

      At least that’s my understanding. It likely can’t stay in this limbo for long, anyway. Will this court be corrupt enough to say it’s constitutional when it’s clearly not? I really hope not.

      • jacksilver@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        The Supreme Court onky stated the injunctions must be “narrower”, but didn’t provide specifications as to what that means (to my understanding/recollection). They could still say a statewide injunction is too broad.

        But yeah, I agree, I don’t know how you have a patchwork of injunctions on birthright citizenship. It just sounds do stupid. Either it is or isn’t legal, and you probably should figure it out before allowing it to affect anyone.

        But the Republicans on the Supreme Court clearly don’t care about the law anymore.