this post was submitted on 10 Apr 2025
53 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
10336 readers
101 users here now
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
A bridge too far for this court? Good thing I was sitting down.
This is just so obvious. It's unclear how the "oops" defense could possibly win the day in something so egregious. But it also gives Roberts et al. cover for later rulings that are less benevolent: "Hey, we told the government to bring that guy back from El Salvador! You can't claim we aren't following the Constitution!"
Yeah. I read it more as "Please exclude me from consequences if any in the future, but no we won't stop him. Hey, we said they should 'begin process to'. Should be good?"
Maybe I am cynical but I don't think the Supreme Court is where the rescue will come from.