by
Alex
Wong/Getty
Images)
On
Friday,
the
ACLU
asked
the
Supreme
Court
if
it
actually
trusted
the
Trump
administration
to
follow
the
law
and
around
1
a.m.
on
Saturday
morning,
seven
of
the
justices
responded
“LOL,
no.”
After
already
ordering
the
government
to
stop
deporting
people
to
El
Salvador
slave
prison
without
due
process,
the
government
spent
the
end
of
the
week
moving
detainees
in
a
manner
that
looked
suspiciously
like
the
prelude
to
sending
another
shipment
to
the
gulags.
Justice
Alito
—
the
justice
responsible
for
the
Fifth
Circuit
—
didn’t
act,
but
the
rest
of
his
colleagues
sans
Thomas
sure
did.
The
order
came
out
before
Alito
penned
his
dissent,
an
unusual
move
that
can
be
read
charitably
as
a
courtesy
to
relieve
Alito
from
writing
in
the
middle
of
the
night
and
less-than-charitably
as
the
rest
of
the
Court
calling
bullshit
on
an
effort
by
the
justice
to
slowplay
the
order
to
give
the
White
House
a
chance
to
get
detainees
snug
in
El
Salvadoran
beds
before
the
justices
could
act.
He
did
manage
to
get
a
dissent
filed
roughly
22
hours
later
and…
the
Court
was
right
that
it
was
not
worth
the
wait.
Bro
got
an
extension
for
the
take
home
final
and
he
still
couldn’t
muster
a
passing
grade.
Issue,
Rule,
Application,
and
Conclusion…
IRAC.
It’s
the
first-year
law
student’s
guide
to
reading
a
court
opinion.
Alito
doesn’t
really
deliver
when
it
comes
to
checking
all
those
boxes.
Instead,
he
produced
a
little
less
than
five
pages
of
material
on
Saturday
channeling
South
Park’s
infamous
Underpants
Gnomes:
Step
1:
Issue;
Step
2:
Rule;
Step
3:
???;
Step
4:
Conclusion.
It
is
not
clear
that
the
Court
had
jurisdiction.
The
All
Writs
Act
does
not
provide
an
independent
grant
of
jurisdiction….
Therefore,
this
Court
had
jurisdiction
only
if
the
Court
of
Appeals
had
jurisdiction
of
the
applicants’
appeal.
That’s
an
issue
and
that’s
a
rule…
at
least
up
until
the
last
part.
As
Professor
Steve
Vladeck
notes
in
his
review
of
the
Alito
dissent,
the
second
sentence
doesn’t
make
a
lick
of
sense
because
it
would
mean
the
Supreme
Court
couldn’t
review
an
appellate
court’s
decision
that
it
lacked
jurisdiction
even
if
the
lower
court
is
wrong.
Alito
suggests
that
the
appellate
court
couldn’t
have
jurisdiction,
because
the
district
court
—
Trump-appointed
judge
Wesley
Hendrix
—
didn’t
technically
deny
the
temporary
restraining
order:
But
here,
the
“order”
that
applicants
appealed
was
what
they
viewed
as
the
District
Court’s
“constructive”
denial
of
their
request
for
a
temporary
restraining
order
(TRO).
This
is
where
one
would
normally
apply
the
rule
to
the
facts.
Did
the
district
court’s
action
properly
set
up
an
appeal?
Judge
Hendrix
sat
on
the
issue
for
14
hours
despite
the
fact
that
the
government
has
already
spirited
away
detainees
in
a
naked
bid
to
avoid
judicial
review
and
then
dissembled
about
it.
The
government’s
behavior
on
this
point
was
so
egregious
that
the
Supreme
Court
has
already
had
to
rule
unanimously
against
the
Trump
administration
on
this
point.
And
since
then,
the
government
has
openly
pissed
on
the
Supreme
Court’s
ruling.
At
this
point,
Trump
is
taking
the
public
stance
that
once
a
detainee
arrives
in
El
Salvador,
they
have
no
recourse.
One
can
see
how
that
might
amount
to
a
risk
of
“irreparable
harm.”
You
know,
if
one
were
interested
in
applying
the
rules
to
the
facts
here.
In
any
event,
does
a
14-hour
delay
under
these
circumstances
properly
amount
to
a
constructive
denial
of
the
injunction
or
not?
Alito…
doesn’t
even
try
to
answer!
Instead,
he
asserts
that
it’s
“not
clear”
—
which
is
kind
of
the
point
of
the
appeal.
It
is
questionable
whether
the
applicants
complied
with
the
general
obligation
to
seek
emergency
injunctive
relief
in
the
District
Court
before
asking
for
such
relief
from
an
appellate
court.
Issue
and
rule,
again.
Application?
Again,
not
so
much.
Did
the
applicants
seek
emergency
relief?
Clearly
they
did
for
over
half
a
day.
Does
that
sufficiently
amount
to
fulfilling
this
obligation?
Alito
does
not
say
other
than
to
invent
the
idea
that
this
all
happened
on
45
minutes
notice
—
which
it
did
not
—
and
he’s
unwilling
to
cite
any
reason
why
45
minutes
wouldn’t
meet
even
if
it
were
true.
No
cases.
Just
vibes.
Which
he
might’ve
been
able
to
get
away
with
at
1
a.m.
on
Friday.
After
an
additional
22
hours
to
write
a
four-and-a-half
page
essay,
he’s
got
to
put
in
at
least
some
effort.
He’s
able
to
put
together
a
lengthy
prebuttal
for
the
Wall
Street
Journal
on
a
dime
when
he’s
about
to
be
outed
for
taking
luxury
vacations
from
billionaires…
he
should
try
bringing
some
of
that
energy
to
his
actual
job.
When
this
Court
rushed
to
enter
its
order,
the
Court
of
Appeals
was
considering
the
issue
of
emergency
relief,
and
we
were
informed
that
a
decision
would
be
forthcoming.
This
Court,
however,
refused
to
wait.
But
under
this
Court’s
Rule
23.3,
“[e]xcept
in
the
most
extraordinary
circumstances,
an
application
for
a
stay
will
not
be
entertained
unless
the
relief
requested
was
first
sought
in
the
appropriate
court
or
courts
below
or
from
a
judge
or
judges
thereof.”
“Ahem…
Mr.
Alito:
do
the
facts
here
amount
to
‘extraordinary
circumstances’
per
the
rule?”
a
stern
professor
would
ask
at
this
juncture.
Alito
isn’t
even
going
so
far
as
to
say
“no”
let
alone
provide
any
legal
reasoning.
This
would
earn
him
a
ruthless
interrogation
in
law
school,
but
as
a
judge
he
gets
to
just
move
on
to
the
next
bullet
point
in
lieu
of
even
attempting
an
answer.
The
only
papers
before
this
Court
were
those
submitted
by
the
applicants.
The
Court
had
not
ordered
or
received
a
response
by
the
Government
regarding
either
the
applicants’
factual
allegations
or
any
of
the
legal
issues
presented
by
the
application.
That’s
how
these
injunctions
work!
If
the
Court
waited
for
the
government
to
write
up
a
response,
the
people
at
issue
would
be
in
CECOT
before
the
DOJ
fired
up
ChatGPT
to
scribble
whatever
they’re
planning
to
submit.
The
Supreme
Court
will
hear
from
the
government
in
due
course
and
no
one
gets
shipped
to
another
country
in
the
meantime.
Status
quo
preserved
yadda
yadda
yadda.
This
is
a
bit
of
a
Trump
DOJ
own
goal,
of
course.
If
they
weren’t
so
adamant
that
it’s
impossible
to
retrieve
someone
from
El
Salvador,
they
might
be
able
to
sell
the
story
that
there’s
no
irreparable
harm.
But
the
administration
doesn’t
seem
to
care
as
much
about
winning
these
cases
than
laying
the
groundwork
to
ignore
the
courts.
The
papers
before
us,
while
alleging
that
the
applicants
were
in
imminent
danger
of
removal,
provided
little
concrete
support
for
that
allegation.
Members
of
this
Court
have
repeatedly
insisted
that
an
All
Writs
Act
injunction
pending
appeal
may
only
be
granted
when,
among
other
things,
“the
legal
rights
at
issue
are
indisputably
clear
and,
even
then,
sparingly
and
only
in
the
most
critical
and
exigent
circumstances.”
Alito
cites
cases
here…
though
doesn’t
engage
with
the
important
question:
is
this
one
of
those
critical
and
exigent
circumstances?
“Here’s
the
rule,
it
has
the
following
exceptions…
ANYWAY
ON
TO
MY
NEXT
POINT”
is
a
failing
law
school
exam.
Presumably
Alito
knows
this
and
that’s
why
he
was
probably
hoping
the
government
could
have
flown
everyone
across
the
border
before
he
had
to
commit
any
of
this
gibberish
to
paper.
Although
this
Court
did
not
hear
directly
from
the
Government
regarding
any
planned
deportations
under
the
Alien
Enemies
Act
in
this
matter,
an
attorney
representing
the
Government
in
a
different
matter,
J.
G.
G.
v.
Trump,
No.
1:25–cv–766
(DC),
informed
the
District
Court
in
that
case
during
a
hearing
yesterday
evening
that
no
such
deportations
were
then
planned
to
occur
either
yesterday,
April
18,
or
today,
April
19.
This
is
the
closest
he’s
going
to
come
to
hinting
at
a
fact
that
might
keep
this
from
warranting
an
exception
to
the
rule.
But
as
a
recitation
of
the
facts,
it’s
half
the
story
at
best
—
leaving
out
the
government’s
demonstrated
conduct
of
hurriedly
launching
unannounced
flights
to
get
around
the
courts
—
and
disingenuous
at
worst.
From
Professor
Vladeck’s
account:
According
to multiple
accounts
of
folks
who
were
listening,
Ensign
said
he
was
unaware
of
any
flights
scheduled
for
Friday,
but
that
he
was
specifically
instructed
to
“reserve
the
right”
for
the
government
to
conduct
removals
on
Saturday,
April
19.
In
other
words,
the
DOJ
lawyer
did not say
what
Alito
said
he
said.
Alito
whimpers
to
a
conclusion
with
a
one-sentence
bullet
point:
Although
the
Court
provided
class-wide
relief,
the
District
Court
never
certified
a
class,
and
this
Court
has
never
held
that
class
relief
may
be
sought
in
a
habeas
proceeding.
Well,
there’s
a
first
time
for
everything.
And
in
this
instance,
it’s
not
even
much
of
a
stretch
since
multiple
circuits
have
held
this
and
none
have
yet
disagreed.
Both
the
Executive
and
the
Judiciary
have
an
obligation
to
follow
the
law.
The
Executive
must
proceed
under
the
terms
of
our
order
in
Trump
v.
J.
G.
G.,
604
U.
S.
_
(2025)
(per
curiam),
and
this
Court
should
follow
established
procedures.
Except
Alito
has
offered
nothing
to
suggest
that
this
violated
any
of
the
Court’s
established
procedures.
He
admits
repeatedly
that
this
would
be
allowed
in
exceptional
circumstances
and
then
never
bothers
to
pose
a
reason
why
this
isn’t
exactly
the
sort
of
exceptional
circumstance
the
rule
is
designed
to
accommodate.
It’s
either
intellectually
lazy
or
deeply
cynical.
Or
a
combination
of
both.
(Dissent
on
the
next
page…)
Joe
Patrice is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter or
Bluesky
if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a
Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search.