The 4th was slamming Wall down every half-sentence, and 9th is letting him just go on.
-
-
Paez says that the EO doesn't say anything about Japanese. Wall admits he doesn't know much about the specifics of the EO in that case.
-
Wall says that no court today would say that Korematsu survived Mandel. That... is a statement I would like further input on.
-
Trump surrogates have said that Korematsu is good law.
-
Wall wraps up and reserves the remainder of his time. That went really really well for him.
-
Neal Katyal [also once an acting solicitor general!] is now arguing for the state of Hawaii.
-
Katyal says that the 9th in Washington v. Trump said Mandel did not apply, "That is a square holding of this court."
-
I believe he just read from the decision.
-
Katyal starts reading off Trump's statements.
-
PAEZ: Those statements are profound. I'm familiar with them, I've read them. But asks if they should note context of contentious campaign
-
Katyal says that as the district court found, it wasn't just campaign statements. Notes the "We all know what that means" moment
-
KATYAL: We're not trying to get into the president's head.
-
LMFAO KATYAL JUST READ ALOUD A QUOTE ABOUT THE "MUCH-OVERTURNED NINTH CIRCUIT" IN THE NINTH CIRCUIT
-
i'm screaming
-
he inserted a very small "sorry" right after the quote
-
That quote ends with Trump saying that they should go back to the first order.
-
Katyal says that if they take away all of Trump's statements, they wouldn't even get the order in the first place—no president has done this
-
The McCreary case says that they have to take the context into account.
-
KATYAL: This is a very unusual circumstance in which you have all of these statements.
-
Katyal says that the govt's interpretation of 1182 would allow the executive to take a "magic eraser" to the US Code on immigration
-
Seems like this panel is just more quiet than the previous 9th Cir panel and the 4th Cir en banc.
-
(Makes sense in the latter, because en banc is so many judges)
-
Katyal is getting through very long sentences without interpretation
-
GOULD: If we find that the Establishment clause claim can't support the district court's injunction, can we uphold on the statutory claims?
-
KATYAL: Absolutely.
-
That would be interesting.
-
Based on questioning, Paez fucking hates Donald Trump, Gould wants to split the baby, and Hawkins only hates Donald Trump a little bit
-
HAWKINS: Why shouldn't we be deferential to the office of the president on such issues?
-
KATYAL: The test is an objective observer, not what the president thinks. ... we're not trying to get into his head.
-
It would be a big upset if the 9th came back striking down the injunction, but this entire line of cases has been high drama from day 1
-
Katyal starts listing off amici who are appalled by the EO creating a disfavored category of people, "even the Cato Institute!"
- 42 réponses de plus
Nouvelle conversation -
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.