Date: June 28th, 2025 11:02 PM Author: bearded internet-worthy wrinkle national
"Oh no - what should we do during the 3 years from the point where the president passes a questionable law to where we weigh in on it! We don't really know, but the district court shouldn't be issuing a universal injunction!"
I dunno - maybe if we're trying to figure out if 10 million people are actually citizens of this country you could just weigh in on it immediately rather than make them go through 2 prolonged scrimmage trials?
Date: June 28th, 2025 11:06 PM Author: Ocher marvelous church foreskin
you do understand that in the absence of a trial of some sort you cannot establish facts, which are necessary for a determination, the issue with injunctions is that they are done on a preliminary basis without bothering to do the part where you figure out wtf is true
Date: June 28th, 2025 11:15 PM Author: Ocher marvelous church foreskin
a great many policies may be unconstitutional "as applied" and that certainly requires a factual finding, the very high level stuff does require less but you still can't just assume everything the plaintiff says is true