BREAKING: Supreme Court says Trump-era border restriction will remain in effect while legal challenges play out

[Rogue AI]

Is the policy constitutional? That's all they need to decide on. They don't make policy. "Stability" is not their concern. It's up to the lawmakers to do that.

The dems thought RvW was 'stable' after 50 years but SCOTUS thought differently. They did not create a policy, they just struck a un-constitutional ruling down and sent it back to the states.

The Constitutionality is not in question, the question before the Court is whether the policy can lapse. There is no activism here.

As to RvW, the Constitutionality was always in question and now settled. Had the Court flip-flopped dozens of times since it's inception based on the politics of the day, it would be activism.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

It will be fun to watch the Biden administration explain in court why it's important to kill Title 42 so we can allow an even larger wave of illegals flooding in, and why it's important that the ones who will end up being kicked out, should be allowed to stay longer.

 

[AMart]

Does anyone think (((Mayorkas))) will follow the law?

 

[Care4all]

It's both good and bad. Sending back via title 42 allows them to come back and try again, 10, 20, 30 or unlimited times with no arrest.

If they attempted entry without title 42 and were rejected by the court, and sent home, then on the 2nd attempt of border entry, would be a FELONY, and charged in court with such....and imprisoned.

Title 42, lets them try multiple re entries, with no criminal charges.