Lowly district court functionary Brian Murphy ruled that Trump could not deport illegal aliens with deportation orders -- some convicted of attempted murder -- to a third country. I think Trump wanted to deport them to a third country because they claim their home country is a shithole country and they say they'd be persecuted there or some bullshit.
The Supreme Court overruled him and said that the deportations can continue.
Deciding that he is now more supreme than the Supremes, this dinky little bureaucrat worm now writes an order that effectively blocks the deportation the Supreme Court just said could proceed.
He's saying that the Supreme Court's ruling doesn't apply to the six people this case is specifically about.
President Donald Trump's administration urged the Supreme Court on Tuesday to allow it to immediately deport a group of migrants currently being held on a US military base in Djibouti to South Sudan, saying the judge handling the case defied the high court.
The unusual motion came hours after a divided Supreme Court allowed the administration to resume deporting migrants to countries other than their homeland, including places like South Sudan, with minimal notice. Later Monday, a district court judge in Massachusetts ruled that the order didn't apply to the specific migrants in Djibouti.
Describing the lower court's order as "untenable," the Trump administration accused US District Judge Brian Murphy of being in "defiance" of the Supreme Court's order and suggested in its brief on Tuesday that the justices remove him from the case.
"The district court's ruling of last night is indefensible," the Department of Justice told the Supreme Court.
"The district court's ruling of last night is a lawless act of defiance that, once again, disrupts sensitive diplomatic relations and slams the brakes on the executive's lawful efforts to effectuate third-country removals," the administration said.
As is often the case on the Supreme Court's emergency docket, the order Monday afternoon provided little detail about the implications of the decision. The Trump administration had asked the justices to put on hold an order from Murphy, which found that the government's efforts to deport migrants to third-party countries without additional due process "unquestionably" violated constitutional protections.
The Supreme Court granted that request, allowing the administration to continue those removals to third countries broadly while the litigation continues.
But later Monday, Murphy ruled that the Supreme Court's order didn't affect a group of immigrants being detained by the US at a military base in Djibouti -- a group that has become a focal point in the fight over the removal policy. The migrants, including some from Cuba, Vietnam and Laos, were being held in a converted Conex shipping container.
Murphy said the government must continue to assess claims they make about fear of being tortured before removing them to South Sudan. He had mandated those assessments in a separate order on May 21 that the Trump administration did not appeal.
On Tuesday, the Justice Department also suggested the Supreme Court "may consider ordering that the case be reassigned to a different district judge."
Administration attorneys urged the justices to "clarify" that its order Monday also covers Murphy's separate May 21 order involving the migrants in Djibouti. If the Supreme Court agreed to do so, that would mean those migrants could be removed to South Sudan.
Julie Kelly
@julie_kelly2
NEW: Trump DOJ asks SCOTUS for clarification on Judge Brian Murphy's "unprecedented defiance of this Court's authority" related to Murphy's order last night to ignore SCOTUS' hold on his ban on deporting criminal illegals to third countries.
DOJ: "The district court's ruling of last night is a lawless act of defiance that, once again, disrupts sensitive diplomatic relations and slams the brakes on the Executive's lawful efforts to effectuate third-country removals. The district court's ruling of last night is indefensible."
Trump DOJ also suggests SCOTUS should pre-approve any future injunctions issued in the case and/or reassign the matter to a different judge.
"The district court was not free to ignore this Court's decision or to insist that it can continue to enforce the very injunction that the stay order rendered unenforceable."
Stephen Miller promises "fireworks" over this latest judicial insurrection.