Litigation will continue one way or another, just maybe not in front of Supreme Court
When Trump rolled out a new Permanent Travel Order last night, I noted that there was a substantial question whether this rendered the pending Supreme Court case as to Trave Order No. 2 moot:
So what happens to the pending Supreme Court case? It seems that so much of the case as sought an injunction against Travel Order No. 2 is moot, meaning there’s nothing left to enjoin. I’d have to dig deeper into the pleadings to know if the entire case goes away, but it seems that much of it will.
The Supreme Court just posted an Order requesting briefing specifically on the question of mootness, and canceling the scheduled October 5 oral argument:
The parties are directed to file letter briefs addressing whether, or to what extent, the Proclamation issued on September 24, 2017, may render cases No. 16-1436 and 16-1540 moot. The parties should also address whether, or to what extent, the scheduled expiration of Sections 6(a) and 6(b) of Executive Order No. 13780 may render those aspects of case No. 16-1540 moot. The briefs, limited to 10 pages, are to be filed simultaneously with the Clerk and served upon opposing counsel on or before noon, Thursday, October 5, 2017. The cases are removed from the oral argument calendar, pending further order of the Court.
I’m sure there will be plenty of insta-analyses of mootness. If I find any particularly interesting, I’ll add to this post.
Regardless, as mentioned in my prior post, groups like the ACLU are promising more litigation as to the new Permanent Travel Order.DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.