“People who enter the country illegally may still “have a weighty liberty interest in remaining here and therefore must be afforded due process under the Fifth Amendment,” a new federal court ruling says.
…
The judge suggests that “prioritizing speed over all else will inevitably lead the Government to erroneously remove people via this truncated process,” since “most noncitizens living in the interior have been here longer than two years, rendering them ineligible for expedited removal, and many are seeking asylum or another form of immigration relief, entitling them to further process before they can be removed.””
“In tossing out the lawsuit, U.S. District Judge Thomas Cullen — an appointee of Donald Trump — lamented what he described as the White House’s months-long “smear” of the federal judiciary.”
“Senate Republicans have already said they plan to move quickly to confirm Trump’s Council of Economic Advisers Chair Stephen Miran to fill one current vacancy. If Cook loses a pending legal challenge and is dismissed — and her replacement is confirmed by the GOP-controlled Senate —Trump-appointed Fed governors would hold four of the seven seats on the central bank’s board.
That majority, in turn, would be enough to control the reappointment of the 12 regional bank presidents throughout the country who also have a say on rates and whose five-year terms are scheduled to expire in February.
And that, in effect, could give Trump control of the Fed’s policy-making Federal Open Market Committee, whose refusal to lower interest rates throughout his second term has put the president on the warpath with Fed Chair Jerome Powell. Any exertion of White House control over the reappointment process for regional bank presidents would represent an extraordinary break in precedent.”
“the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit will hear oral arguments in a case that could determine the fate of the Trump tariffs—or clear the way for a huge expansion of executive control over economic affairs. The administration is appealing a May decision from the Court of International Trade (CIT), where judges unanimously sided with a collection of small business owners and state attorneys general who challenged the president’s use of emergency powers to impose tariffs on nearly all imports.
At the center of the case is the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), the 1977 law that the Trump administration used in February to slap tariffs on imports from Canada, China, and Mexico. The Trump administration again invoked IEEPA to impose its so-called “Liberation Day” tariffs in early April, which included a universal 10 percent tariff on all imports and higher, country-specific tariffs, some of which are set to go into effect on August 1 after being delayed several times.
In May, the CIT ruled that Trump had overstepped the authority granted by the emergency powers law. “We do not read IEEPA to delegate an unbounded tariff authority to the president,” the judges said in a unanimous opinion. “We instead read IEEPA’s provisions to impose meaningful limits on any such authority it confers.”
The Trump administration appealed that ruling, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit placed a temporary stay on the lower court’s ruling, allowing the tariffs to remain in force until the appeals court has a chance to review the case.”
The Supreme Court used to use the shadow docket, where it gives a quick and binding decision without explanation, mostly for death penalty cases. For Trump, the court has done these more often, often giving Trump powers that seem unconstitutional, allowing him to take actions difficult to reverse even if he loses later.
Supporters of textualism act like it is a simple way of reading the law, but judges who practice textualism often claim a clear text is ambiguous or an ambiguous text is clear based on what fits their political or ideological bias.
“The judge found that many of those swept up in immigration raids were taken to the basement of a federal building in Los Angeles to a room known as “B-18” meant to temporarily house arrestees while they are being processed. Frimpong found that many detainees were held there for hours without access to counsel.”
“”Due process is the most foundational legal principle protecting individual liberty in Western civilization. It dates back to the Magna Carta,” Bolick observed. Yet “we have seen the words due process appear in quotes repeatedly, as if this concept was created by rogue liberal judges to help illegal immigrants stay in the country.””
…
“Bolick is a principled legal thinker and one of the genuine good guys in American law. If he is worried about the health of our constitutional order, we should all pay heed.”