This will be, as noted in my story, a matter of the administration's application of today's order and, ultimately, court interpretations.
-
-
I'm not surprised they added a mootness question; I am a bit surprised they added this version of this question.
-
This question basically asks whether the June 14 presidential memorandum was able to change the effective date of the bans.
-
There still, of course, would be a related mootness question of: What about 90 days from whenever it goes into effect?
-
[Note: The "June 14" mootness question was noted in the per curiam order earlier today as being added to the merits briefing.]
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
i maybe never encountered the word “mootness” — like, "oh my mootness," which is when something would be shocking but the moment has passed.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Looks like the Court announced that added question on page 9 of the earlier order: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/16pdf/16-1436_l6hc.pdf …
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Which means?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Is that unusual for the court to do?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Je ne comprend pas. or in English, huh?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.