> Some feelers in America upset that Bangladesh summarily executes drug traffickers? They can sue for violation of “the law of nations.”
Citation? In the mifepristone case just yesterday, SCOTUS reminded us of the need for "standing" — albeit while practically drawing a road map for other plaintiffs to try again.
Question: Under your reasoning, are Judge Kacsmaryk's nationwide injunctions, e.g., in the mifepristone case, similarly "stupid and arrogant," even though they're technically permissible under the All-Writs Act [which needs major revision IMHO]?
> Citation? In the mifepristone case just yesterday, SCOTUS reminded us of the need for "standing" — albeit while practically drawing a road map for other plaintiffs to try again.
Some “human rights” group in the U.S. would just have to find a random Bangladeshi person (including a non-citizen) to claim some family member was killed in some supposedly “illegal” execution of drug dealers.
> Question: Under your reasoning, are Judge Kacsmaryk's nationwide injunctions, e.g., in the mifepristone case, similarly "stupid and arrogant," even though they're technically permissible under the All-Writs Act [which needs major revision IMHO]?
No because he’s a judge of the same legal entity being enjoined. Unlike the national borders, the federal districts are mostly just lines in an org chart.
Citation? In the mifepristone case just yesterday, SCOTUS reminded us of the need for "standing" — albeit while practically drawing a road map for other plaintiffs to try again.
Question: Under your reasoning, are Judge Kacsmaryk's nationwide injunctions, e.g., in the mifepristone case, similarly "stupid and arrogant," even though they're technically permissible under the All-Writs Act [which needs major revision IMHO]?