The Supreme Court is about to hear a case that will give its justices one of the "strongest" reasons to rule against the Trump administration, a former prosecutor said Sunday.
Ex-federal prosecutor Joyce Vance over the weekend previewed the case's upcoming hearing, which is scheduled to take place on Thursday. The issue at hand, according to Vance, "is whether a district judge can issue an injunction that takes effect nationwide, or whether their decision is only applicable within their judicial district, or even limited just to the parties in front of them."
She noted that "the issue here is a legal one that should transcend politics, one that is about legal principles and drawing lines as opposed to a results-oriented ruling that says nationwide injunctions are okay so long as whoever is making the decisions is happy with the outcome."
EXCLUSIVE: Breastfeeding mom of US citizen sues Kristi Noem after being grabbed by ICE
Vance went on to make some predictions about how the case turned out.
Specifically, the attorney noted that "it’s far less likely we will get—or at least we shouldn’t—an all-or-nothing rule that says nationwide injunctions are always permitted or, conversely, never permitted."
"The difficult task in front of the Supreme Court is the line-drawing exercise. It’s one that has been brewing for some time, which makes it all the more interesting that the Court agreed to let it come to a head and hear the issue in the context of this case," she added. "That’s because this is one of the strongest contexts imaginable for arguing in favor of permitting nationwide injunctions. Otherwise, there would be a patchwork quilt of citizenship creation, depending on the state in which a person was born. Managing that situation would be, as we say in the south, a hot mess."
