 |
July 13, 2025 |
 |
This week, I sat down with former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance for an interview. We talked about the implications of the Supreme Court’s recent decisions, the Trump administration’s threat to deport Kilmar Abrego Garcia to a third country and much more. I hope you enjoy reading it. |
Every Sunday, I share a write-up like this of my favorite interview of the week, exclusively with members. Upgrade now so you never miss one. |
Marc: I have a couple of Supreme Court theories I want to put on the table and have you react to. First, I noticed that over the last three terms, we get a flurry of like not terribleness in late May/early June only to have the final decisions issued be really bad. And you mentioned the shadow docket case involving [deportations to] South Sudan. It was just a month or two ago. So what do you think of these 9-0 decisions coming in early on, only to have the 6-3 decisions at the end of the term?
Joyce: You know, I try to resist the temptation to believe that they sucker punch us with these 9-0 decisions that show us their good faith and unanimity. I know that's one read. I think it's because those cases that are easier to decide come first. Even if they're big cases, if there's unanimity astir, then they're gonna come before the end. And it's these cases with dissents and concurrences that come at the last minute. People are working on them. I'm sure that there's an effort to trade votes down to the very last minute. So I don't read anything too nefarious into it. I think it just helps us understand the process.
Marc: Can you help distill for people who are not lawyers, or who are lawyers — what is the state of due process for people that the government wants to remove from the country? Because I felt like we had a big win a few months ago, maybe.
Joyce: It was the precursor to this case [A.A.R.P. v. Trump], where the government was trying to secret people out of the country under the dead of night in the courts. The courts said no, there's a little bit of minimal due process here.
Marc: Right. So is that still true? Or is that less true than it was?
Joyce: So I think it's less true than it was. The problem is, and you know this all too well, that when these cases come off of the shadow docket, which is normal, by the way, there's again nothing malignant at work here. This is the court's emergency docket. They use it, for instance, for death penalty cases. For other emergencies, gotta have one. But these are not cases that have been fully briefed, that have gone to oral argument, and these are not cases where we get written opinions from the court explaining its reasoning when the cases come down. So the real problem is there's an opinion, a decision made by the Supreme Court, that denies these folks what I would call minimal due process before they're dumped into a third country... |
Want to read the rest of my conversation with Joyce Vance?
Upgrade to dive into:
|
|
Tiada ulasan:
Catat Ulasan
Nota: Hanya ahli blog ini sahaja yang boleh mencatat ulasan.