Page 1
Page 1
Started By
Message
locked post

Appeals court judge rebukes Supreme Court for deportation flight decision

Posted on 5/21/25 at 12:18 pm
Posted by BCreed1
Alabama
Member since Jan 2024
6369 posts
Posted on 5/21/25 at 12:18 pm
quote:



View all
Court Battles
Appeals court judge rebukes Supreme Court for deportation flight decision
by Zach Schonfeld - 05/21/25 9:10 AM ET

A federal appeals court judge appointed by President Trump rebuked the Supreme Court for blocking the administration from swiftly deporting a group of Venezuelans under the Alien Enemies Act.

“I write to state my sincere concerns about how the district judge as well as the President and other officials have been treated in this case,” U.S. Circuit Judge James Ho wrote in a concurring opinion published Tuesday.

“I worry that the disrespect they have been shown will not inspire continued respect for the judiciary, without which we cannot long function,” he continued.

Criticizing former Presidents Clinton, Obama and Biden, Ho in his seven-page opinion suggested the courts aren’t treating Trump with the same respect.

“I doubt that any court would deny any of those Presidents the right to express their views in any pending case to which they are a party, before issuing any ruling. Our current President deserves the same respect,” Ho wrote.

“We seem to have forgotten that this is a district court — not a Denny’s,” Ho wrote. “This is the first time I’ve ever heard anyone suggest that district judges have a duty to check their dockets at all hours of the night, just in case a party decides to file a motion.”





LINK
Posted by Stunrunner
Member since Apr 2025
69 posts
Posted on 5/21/25 at 12:24 pm to
quote:

We seem to have forgotten that this is a district court — not a Denny’s


WHATS UP SCOTUS?!?!?!
Posted by Bestbank Tiger
Premium Member
Member since Jan 2005
79039 posts
Posted on 5/21/25 at 12:38 pm to
We have the best Hos, don't we?
Posted by BCreed1
Alabama
Member since Jan 2024
6369 posts
Posted on 5/21/25 at 12:54 pm to
Posted by LSUbest
Coastal Plain
Member since Aug 2007
15004 posts
Posted on 5/21/25 at 1:01 pm to
He also razed them for the time limits compared to another case.

quote:

At 12:48 p.m. on April 18, however, Petitioners “suddenly informed the court that they would file an appeal if the District Court did not act within 42 minutes, i.e., by 1:30 p.m.” Id.

quote:

Notably, the Justices themselves have expressed concerns about making decisions under far more forgiving time constraints than those demanded here.
Recall the emergency relief sought in Does 1-3 v. Mills, 142 S. Ct. 17 (2021). Members of the Court expressed concern about the “use [of] the emergency docket to force the Court” to “grant . . . extraordinary relief” “on a short fuse without benefit of full briefing.” Id. at 18 (Barrett, J., concurring in the denial of application for injunctive relief).
The amount of time considered too short in Does 1-3 was nine days.

Compared to 42 minutes, however, nine days is a lifetime to decide a motion.
So the district court reasonably assumed that the principle invoked in Does 1-3 to justify denying relief to law-abiding citizens concerned about their religious liberties in the COVID-19 era would likewise justify denying relief to illegal alien members of a foreign terrorist organization.


https://redstate.com/smoosieq/2025/05/20/this-is-a-district-courtnot-a-dennys-5th-circuit-responds-to-scotus-in-tda-case-and-hoo-boy-n2189368
Posted by ThePoo
Work
Member since Jan 2007
61254 posts
Posted on 5/21/25 at 1:30 pm to
quote:

We seem to have forgotten that this is a district court
Precisely
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram