Timeline for What's the point of appealing the 9th circuit case to the Supreme Court?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 11, 2017 at 7:49 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| Feb 11, 2017 at 9:06 | |||||
| Feb 10, 2017 at 23:43 | comment | added | phoog | @felipa you are correct, but this answer says that the court case could be rendered moot because "it may be impossible to review it before it is over." That part of this answer is incorrect, because the order does not actually expire after 120 days. | |
| Feb 10, 2017 at 23:42 | comment | added | phoog | Trump's order calls for indefinite suspension of the entry of nationals "from" countries that have been found administratively not to supply "information needed for [visa] adjudications." Also, as noted by @AndrewPiliser, it calls for an indefinite ban on refugees from Syria. So there you have two classes of people for whom the order could be in effect indefinitely. | |
| Feb 10, 2017 at 20:49 | comment | added | Simd | @AndrewPiliser Right but the ruling that just happened by the 9th circuit only relates to the TRO not to the constitutionality of the executive order. The federal court has yet to rule on that and hence there has yet to be an appeal. | |
| Feb 10, 2017 at 19:49 | comment | added | Andrew | While the main chunk of the order is temporary, the suspension of Syrian refugees is indefinite. That provision may still be in effect whenever the court hears the case. | |
| Feb 10, 2017 at 18:41 | history | edited | Brythan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 1 character in body
|
| Feb 10, 2017 at 16:20 | comment | added | SoylentGray | @felipa - No they wont they typically rule on the procedural issues before the legality issues. If there is a problem with the procedure to get there... in this case the TRO they would rule on the TRO and send it back to the court to adjudicate with the new direction from the higher court. The same case could end up back befoer the SC for arguements about the consititutionality | |
| Feb 10, 2017 at 16:14 | comment | added | Simd | @DrunkenSanta9035768 OK so potentially there are two separate Supreme Court cases. One about TROs and the other about the constitutionality of this executive order. I wonder if the Supreme Court will regard it as a waste of their time to consider them separately. | |
| Feb 10, 2017 at 16:13 | comment | added | SoylentGray | @felipa - yes but in the future a SC Ruling could be used in arguements against a TRO assuming the SC does not boot this one like they have some others. | |
| Feb 10, 2017 at 16:10 | comment | added | Simd | But the precedent would be about the TRO (temporary restraining order) and not about any ruling of constitutionality of the executive order, wouldn't it? If they want the Supreme Court to rule on the constitutionality of the executive order it seems they have to wait for a lower federal court to rule on that first. | |
| Feb 10, 2017 at 16:09 | history | answered | Alonzo Muncy | CC BY-SA 3.0 |