This isnât any old case; itâs the case in which the government has come the closest to outright defiance of a court order (something Chief Judge Boasberg is still in the middle of adjudicating). And itâs the case that led President Trump to call for the impeachment of a sitting federal judge for doing nothing other than rule against him (a statement that led to a surprisingly quick and aggressive rebuttal from Chief Justice Roberts). Not two weeks later, hereâs Roberts providing the decisive vote to hold that, in fact, the case shouldnât have been before that judge (or that court) in the first place, without even a hint that any of the governmentâs (profoundly disturbing) behavior in this case warrants any reproach. As Justice Sotomayor concludes her dissent, âThe Governmentâs conduct in this litigation poses an extraordinary threat to the rule of law. That a majority of this Court now rewards the Government for its behavior with discretionary equitable relief is indefensible. We, as a Nation and a court of law, should be better than this.â
Steve Vladeck in One First. 140. The Disturbing Myopia of Trump v. J.G.G.
In normal times, it might be possible to defend the Supreme Court's 5-4 ruling on Monday vacating a pair of temporary restraining orders in the Alien Enemy Act case. But these aren't normal times.



















