I get that the SCOTUS has to look at it purely from procedural and legal framing - more so than from that of fairness or human rights. Perhaps they didn't have much of a choice on this one: what if returning migrants to their country of origin makes it worse for them? Is unfeasible? The country no longer exists?
Yet what I find inconceivable is the apparent willful ignorance of the clear consequences of the decision in enabling the current admin to abscond the rule of law and abuse human rights - just as Sotomayor laid out.
SCOTUS (or least 6 of them) look more like Trump’s patsies than a co-equal branch of government exercising its checks and balances in a functioning government.
Thanks for starting this Substack. Much needed. — Latha
I get that the SCOTUS has to look at it purely from procedural and legal framing - more so than from that of fairness or human rights. Perhaps they didn't have much of a choice on this one: what if returning migrants to their country of origin makes it worse for them? Is unfeasible? The country no longer exists?
Yet what I find inconceivable is the apparent willful ignorance of the clear consequences of the decision in enabling the current admin to abscond the rule of law and abuse human rights - just as Sotomayor laid out.
Dark times we live in.
SCOTUS (or least 6 of them) look more like Trump’s patsies than a co-equal branch of government exercising its checks and balances in a functioning government.