Opinion | Trump, Refugees and the Supreme Court
The Justices say ‘no judicial review’ in the law means what it says.

On Thursday, the Supreme Court blessed the Trump administration’s efforts to kick hundreds of thousands of Haitians and Syrians out of the United States.
The Justices say ‘no judicial review’ in the law means what it says.
President Donald Trump torpedoed his own Republican Party's moment this week by abruptly canceling the signing of a major housing bill that could have boosted the GOP ahead of midterms, The New York Times reported Thursday.Carl Hulse, New York Times chief Washington correspondent, revealed that the growing ruptures between Trump and Republicans "have crippled the G.O.P. at what should be the peak of its power." Trump instead signaled he would not sign the bill until Republicans passed his elections legislation, the SAVE America Act."Just as Republicans were pointing to the measure as proof that they could deliver big things with their majority, President Trump scuttled his party’s big moment by disparaging the legislation and refusing to sign it unless he got a new bill to impose voting restrictions," Hulse wrote."It was just the latest twist in an increasingly tortured relationship between Mr. Trump and his fellow Republicans, who were left dumbfounded and wondering if, for some reason, the president was trying to sabotage their chances in November and cost them their majorities," Hulse explained. "And it reflected how profoundly Mr. Trump had crippled his once vaunted governing trifecta, now all but paralyzed by his whipsawing demands and pronouncements."Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) commented on the moment."It’s utterly amazing," Schumer said. "Trump is running away from one of the very few accomplishments that could actually help the American people."Trump could still sign the housing legislation, Hulse added. But the repercussions could remain for GOP lawmakers, who were frustrated over the bill and left Washington, D.C. They will return in mid-July, "leaving multiple consequential matters hanging." "Mr. Trump may yet sign the legislation or allow it to become law, but he has already significantly diminished its political impact by dismissing it as minor, questioning its benefits and ditching the signing ceremony," Hulse wrote.
A bitter clash among Supreme Court justices came into view Thursday through a pair of immigration rulings, in which Justice Samuel Alito accused his liberal colleagues of blindsiding him.The friction emerged when Alito announced the court's decision in an asylum case, adopting a narrow interpretation of what it means for a migrant to have "arrived" in the United States under federal law — a reading that makes it significantly harder for asylum seekers who traveled through Mexico and South America to qualify unless they physically set foot on U.S. soil, reported CNN's Joan Biskupic."The tension really hit a climax, and it came when Justice Samuel Alito read three different opinions from the bench, the first one fairly routine, but the second two having to do with immigration and refugee rights," Biskupic reported from outside the court. "What happened in the courtroom showed not just the division but the anger between the two sides, and Justice Alito, right there from the bench, accused his liberal colleague, Sonia Sotomayor of blindsiding him, in effect, when she started to read her dissent from the bench.""Typically, it's the justice who is reading the majority opinion who's the only one who speaks," she added. "If somebody reads a dissent in this case, from the liberals really protesting what has happened in this refugee case."Over roughly 10 minutes, Sotomayor invoked the 1939 voyage of more than 900 Jewish refugees turned away from Cuba and the United States, most of whom later perished in the Holocaust, and tied that history to international treaties protecting people fleeing persecution. She argued the ruling betrayed that legacy and detailed the violence and extortion facing migrants stranded near the border. Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson joined her."Then Justice Alito, who's going to read another opinion, he stops and he says, 'If I had known that the dissent was going to deliver that opinion from the bench, I would have said more, I would have said more about why we ruled the way we did,'" Biskupic said. "It was a very bitter response to what we had just heard."Alito then pressed forward, announcing a second 6-3 ruling restricting the federal government's use of Temporary Protected Status for migrants from Haiti and Syria — another significant win for the administration.The TPS decision could have immediate consequences for refugees who have lived in the U.S. legally for months or years. Biskupic said whether individuals can now be removed depends on their specific status and where they stood in the application process, but the ruling clears a path for the administration to revoke protections it has long sought to end. - YouTube youtu.be
A decision by Justice Sonia Sotomayor to take 12 minutes of the court’s time on Thursday to read her dissent in a 6-3 ruling that makes it significantly harder for asylum seekers who traveled through Mexico and South America to enter the US provoked Justice Sam Alito to take an unseemly potshot at her, which stunned court regulars.According to MS NOW legal analyst Lisa Rubin, arch-conservative Alito sat and listened to a very “calm” Sotomayor read her dissent, with Rubin pointing out, “That is certainly not unusual.”“But here there was a moment of tension between Justices Sotomayor, with her dissent and Justice Alito, who wrote the majority opinion here,” she elaborated. “Producer Peggy Helman, who is in the court for the reading of all of these decisions, said that Justice Alito said in response out loud, ‘There's much I would have added if I had known a dissent would be read from the bench.’”“She [Helman] said that people in the Supreme Court, in the gallery gasped when he said that because this is a group of people that, for all of their differences in terms of legal, interpretive methodology or even the outcome of cases, they like to make it seem as if they get a long; that they are all just rowing in the same direction, trying to do their job to uphold the rule of law” Rubin reported. “Even when their conceptions of what the rule of law is differs, that very obvious public fracture between the two of them was one that was surprising even to the most veteran court watchers in the room today,” she added. - YouTube youtu.be
Justice Samuel Alito took aim at arguments from Hawaii‘s reliance on the “spirit of aloha” as rationale for expansive and restrictive gun laws, in a ruling Thursday striking down a sweeping firearm law in the Aloha State. The Supreme Court ruled 6-3, on ideological lines, to strike down a sweeping Hawaii gun law that required […]
Here are the best quotes from Justice Alito's majority opinion in Wolford v. Lopez.
Supreme Court Associate Justice Samuel Alito derided legal arguments presented by Hawaii in an opinion released Thursday that invalidated a state law targeting concealed carry gun owners. […]
Justice Samuel Alito smacked down his leftist colleague Sonia Sotomayor following today's landmark ruling on asylum in a move that is surprising court observers. The post Justice Samuel Alito Delivers Impromptu Response to Sonia Sotomayor After She Reads Her Stupid Dissent From the Bench in Landmark Asylum-Seeker Case appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.