It's giving Justice Chase and John Adams

I mean they're in the briefs family at least

The advocates on the "good" side of the major cases this term have all kind of sucked so far

(With the possible exception of the tariffs case)

Wait they were really cooking with that GameCube one

He's been auditioning for the next open SCOTUS seat and gave an interview where he seemed to backtrack, but if you read closely he just used ambiguous phrasing about children of enemy combatants. Seems like he's trying to parrot Trump rhetoric without actually changing his stance.

I regret we won't get an opinion clarifying state standing for the purpose of future nationwide injunctions, but this is obviously the rational choice

Senator Cassidy sure did a bang-up job vetting didn't he

With regards to point 2, the Court basically said as much in a footnote of an unrelated case in the 80's, so this is the opportunity to say so directly instead of in dicta.

Well, there are probably two reasons:

1. Having the EO in effect in some circuits but not others while parallel lawsuits proceed on different schedules is a mess

2. They've never directly addressed if children of immigrants who aren't "permanently domiciled" are covered by the clause.

I understand your skepticism! I think it's perfectly justified considering the court's rulings the past year.

I just think this is the rare instance where Trump's goals are not aligned with the court. Even their opinion in Trump v CASA gave lower courts a roadmap for crafting valid injunctions

Right, but I mean the reason they take major issues of national importance before waiting for a circuit split is to establish a nationwide precedent right away.

Otherwise plaintiffs would have to get the executive order stricken down by 11 circuits independently

We should be safe. Major figures in the conservative legal movement have written at length about the original meaning of the birthright citizenship clause.

Plus Justice Barrett always says it's not about the result drafters of a text EXPECTED, it's about what the text actually meant

For major national policies like this they typically don't wait for a circuit split to arise before granting cert. TikTok ban, student loans, Census citizenship question, etc etc

One of the rare instances in which originalism and MAGAism directly conflict. This should be fun.

I mean if even *Judge Ho* is against you as a conservative, whew

This is one of the rare instances where originalism and MAGAism directly conflict. This'll be fun to watch.

This. If even Judge Ho from the 5th Circuit is making rounds defending birthright citizenship, it's pretty easy to see how a (kind of) originalist court is going to land on this.

Which is kind of odd because the Texas map might be the rare case where race and partisanship aren't directly tied? Hispanic voters trended sharply right but that's not likely to be a long-term pattern