[firesteelrain]

That’s exactly how constitutional challenges have always worked. In our system, different circuits can interpret federal law differently until SCOTUS resolves the split. It’s not ideal, but it’s how precedent gets built.

Nationwide injunctions didn’t “force” consolidation. Often, they often blocked it.

We need to follow the process as designed.

This ruling restores pressure to actually appeal and get clarity at the appellate or Supreme Court level.

I’ll admit it’s slower but it’s slower by design. Less patchwork this way.

[paulryanrogers]

What if the executive prefers not to appeal their losses because they see a patch work as better than a permanent nationwide loss? Because that seems to be exactly their strategy here.

[firesteelrain]

As I have been saying, courts aren’t not the only avenue to resolve. So what if their strategy is to not appeal? Find another way. Vote, change immigration law, apply political pressure, demand change through democratic means

But certainly don’t use one course of action

Finally injunctions were not envisioned by the Founders. Foreign concept along with circuit court. Only fairly recent

[paulryanrogers]

SCOTUS has been packed, voting districts gerrymandered, the national guard has been deployed against protesters, journalists are being shot with rubber bullets and threatened with legal action, and elected representatives are being charged with trumped up crimes.

The other avenues are also being obstructed.

And Republicans certainly didn't mind nation wide injunctions when they were used to block much of Biden's agenda. Or violent attempts to stop the transfer of power. Or pardons for everyone involved in attempts to stop the transfer of power ...

[firesteelrain]

I hear your frustration, and I don’t want to dismiss it. We should push to fix some of those things