• gatohaus@eviltoast.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    This is definitely worrisome.

    But is it the end of the Constitution quite yet?

    The Supreme Court hasn’t weighed in on the executive order trying to negate birthright citizenship, they said that lower courts couldn’t block EO’s at a national level.

    Implicitly, their not commenting on the EO feels like they’ll let it stand when the case arrives, if they choose to hear it. Then I’d say the US Constitution is toast.

    I’m an engineer, not a lawyer. I’d love to hear what someone more knowledgeable about this thinks.

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      The fact they took a copout path to not speak to the important part is a worrisome sign. If the matter were actually before them, they may rule it as unconstitutional, but they seem to be inclined to have the matter never be technically before them.

      A district ruling against the order? Let it stand without taking up the case and potentially setting it nationwide. The people have no standing to appeal because they won their case.

      Oh look, a jusge in Texas ruled in favor of the order, all of a sudden the government is shuffling immigrants around and deporting all birthright citizens from that jurisdiction.

      • NotAnotherLemmyUser@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        I’m not happy about this either, but let’s just make sure we’re all on the same page here:

        They ended the ability of the Judiciary to check the Executive.

        No, they ended the ability of the lower courts to check the executive nationwide. The supreme court can still check the executive (and the US Court of Appeals?).

        Now I’m trying to figure out if the lower courts can still check the executive, but only in their respective areas, or if they can make a decision, but it has to be confirmed by (at least?) the court of appeals.

        From what I’m reading here: https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/06/supreme-court-sides-with-trump-administration-on-nationwide-injunctions-in-birthright-citizenship-case/

        It looks like a lower court can still request to check the executive, but the higher courts will need to grant it. At least according to Kavanaugh’s opinion:

        the courts of appeals and the Supreme Court will inevitably weigh in on district court decisions granting or denying requests for preliminary injunctions.

        • voracitude@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 day ago

          Yes, let’s make sure we’re on the same page. You’re talking about theory, I’m talking about practice - which, in theory, are the same. In practice, however…

    • 𝕱𝖎𝖗𝖊𝖜𝖎𝖙𝖈𝖍@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      There isn’t going to be a single moment where the constitution stops existing. It’s not like a light switch. It’s a rapid erosion, like the start of a landslide, and the snow is already moving

    • TotallynotJessica@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      2 days ago

      Yes it is. Trump can effectively ignore any constitutional amendment for more than long enough to start sending people to concentration camps. This also probably isn’t the end of it, as I doubt the justices will be more willing to stand up to him in the future once he’s consolidated power further.